ITEMS DESIGNATED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PROCUREMENT
GUIDELINE --
SUPPORTING ANALYSES
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
April, 1995
Contents
I.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A.
Materials In Solid Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Paper and Paperboard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Plastics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
3.
Glass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yard Trimmings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
5.
wood.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.
Rubber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Engine Coolants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.
8.
Blast Furnace Slag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B.
Benefits of Recycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
C.
Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RCRA Section 6002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
2.
Executive Order 12873 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other Requirements and Policies . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
. . . . . .
........
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
15
15
16
18
D.
Criteria for Selecting Items for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Use of Materials Found in Solid Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Economic and Technical Feasibility and Performance . . . . . . . . .
2.
Impact of Government Procurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
Availability and Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
Other Uses for Recovered Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.
Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.
19
20
21
21
22
22
23
E.
Methodology for Selecting Items for Designation .
Selection of Items for Designation . . . . . .
1.
Recommended Recovered Materials Content
2.
Updates of the CPG and RMAN . . . . .
3.
23
24
25
27
. . . . .
. . . . .
Levels
. . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
5
7
8
10
10
11
12
12
13
III.
Agency’s Response to Public Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
IV.
Consolidation of Procurement Guidelines into 40 CFR Part 247 . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8
V.
Purpose, Scope, and Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A.
Purpose and Scope
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii
29
B.
VI.
Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . .
Statutory Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
Who is a Procuring Agency? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
To Which Purchases Does Section 6002 Apply? . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
What is the $10,000 Threshold? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.
29
29
31
31
32
32
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
A.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
VIII. The Affirmative Procurement Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A.
Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
B.
Preference Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Minimum Content Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Case-by-Case Policy Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
Substantially Equivalent Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
Requirements for Contractors and Grantees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.
36
37
37
38
38
39
C.
D.
Promotion Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Internal Promotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
2.
External Promotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Estimation, Certification, and Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
39
40
40
40
E.
Procedures to Monitor and Review the Procurement Program . . . . . . . . . . 40
F.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
....
. . .
. . .
. . . .
VIII.
Categories for Item Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
IX.
Paper and Paper Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
X.
General Comments Applicable to Item Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
XI.
Vehicular Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
46
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
46
A.
Re-refined Lubrication Oil and Retread Tires
B.
Engine Coolants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . 46
2.
iv
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.
4.
XII.
Construction Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
A .
Building Insulation Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency Response . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.
B.
Structural Fiberboard and Laminated Paperboard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
2.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
4.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C.
Plastic
1.
2.
3.
D.
Geotextiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . .
2.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
E.
Cement and Concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
55
55
55
60
62
F.
Carpet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
4.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
62
62
63
65
66
G.
Floor
1.
2.
3.
4.
66
66
67
68
68
50
50
51
51
52
Pipe and Fittings
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Tiles and Patio Blocks . .
Background . . . . . . . .
Summary of Contents and
Rationales for Designation
Designation . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . 54
. . 54
. . 54
. 55
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XIII. Transportation Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
v
A.
Temporary Traffic Control Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
1.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
a.
Traffic Cones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
b.
Traffic Barricades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
c.
Other Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.
Summary of Contents and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
XIV. Park and Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
A.
XV.
Playground Surfaces and Running Tracks . . . . . . . . .
1.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
3. Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
. . . . . . . . . . . . 72
. . . . . . . . . . . . 72
. . . . . . . . . . . 73
. . . . . . . . . . . 73
. . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Landscaping Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
A.
Hydraulic Mulch . .
1.
Background .
2.
Summary of
Rationale for
3.
4.
Designation .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . 74
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
B.
Yard Trimmings Comport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
1.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
2.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4.
XVI. Non-Paper Office Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
A.
Office Recycling Containers and Office Waste
Receptacles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
2.
3.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.
B.
Plastic Desktop Accessories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
1.
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.
vi
3.
4.
C.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Toner Cartridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
3.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
83
83
83
85
86
. .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
86
86
87
87
88
88
Trash Bags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . . . . .
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
89
89
89
89
90
D.
Binders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response . . . . . . . .
2.
Rationale for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
4.
Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recovered Materials Content Recommendations . . . . . . . .
5.
E.
Plastic
1.
2.
3.
4.
.
.
.
.
.
.
XVII. Miscellaneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
90
XVIII. Other Items Considered for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
A.
Potential Items for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
B.
Items Considered Inappropriate for Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
XIX. Availability of Designated Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
XX.
Economic Impact Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
vii
I. INTRODUCTION
On April 20, 1994, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) published
a Comprehensive Procurement Guideline (CPG) proposing to designate items that are or can
be made with recovered materials (see 59 FR 18852-18891, April 20, 1994). This document
provides supporting analysis used by the Agency to issue the final CPG and explains EPA’s
overall objectives, the process for designating procurement items and recommending
procurement practices for those items, and the methodology for recommending materials
content levels for designated items. This document also provides the Agency’s detailed
response to public comments received on the Agency’s proposed rule.
II. BACKGROUND
Section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA or the Act) and the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), requires EPA to designate items that are or can be
made with recovered materials and to recommend practices to assist procuring agencies in
meeting their obligations under RCRA section 6002 with respect to procurement of
designated items. After EPA designates an item, RCRA requires that each procuring agency,
when purchasing a designated item, must purchase that item composed of the highest
percentage of recovered materials practicable.
Executive Order 12873 (Executive Order or E.O.) specifies the procedure for EPA to
follow in implementing RCRA section 6002(e). Section 502 of the Order requires EPA to
designate items in a Comprehensive Procurement Guideline (CPG) and to recommend
procurement practices in a related Recovered Materials Advisory Notice (RMAN).
Since 1983, EPA has issued five guidelines for the procurement of products
containing recovered materials as listed in Table 1. In addition, the Agency published a draft
RMAN for Paper Products, which contains draft new recommended recovered materials,
content levels for paper and paper products (see 60 FR 14182; March 15.1995). EPA is
accepting public comment on these draft recommendations until May 15, 1995. EPA will
publish a final Paper Products RMAN after considering all public comments received.
1
Table 1
EPA Guidelines for Procurement of products Containing Recovered Materials
On April 20, 1994, EPA proposed in a Comprehensive Procurement Guideline to
designate 21 items that are or can be made with recovered materials. The items were
arranged into product categories al shown below:.
Vehicular Products
Reclaimed engine coolants
Construction Products
Structural fiberboard
Laminated paperboard
Plastic pipe and fittings
Geotextiles
Cement/concrete containing ground granulated blast furnace slag
Carpet
Floor tiles
Patio blocks
Transportation Products
Traffic barricades
Traffic cones
Park and Recreation Products
Playground Surfaces
Running Tracks
2
Landscaping Products
Hydraulic Mulch
Yard Trimmings Compost
Non-Paper OffIce Products
Office recycling containers
Office waste receptacles
Plastic desktop accessories
Remanufactured toner cartridges
Binders
Plastic Trash Bags
In addition to proposing to designate the 21 new items, EPA also identified items that
could potentially be designated at a later time depending on the receipt of additional
information; identified items that are not candidates for designation based on our analysis that
it would be inappropriate to do so; announced our intention to establish a process for the
public to suggest items that could be added to future updates of the CPG; and requested
comment on how EPA might be able to increase public participation in developing future
updates to the CPG.
EPA also proposed to delete outdated guidance found in 40 CFR Part 247, which predated the 1934 amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and to
consolidate the existing five procurement guidelines and new item designations
into a new Part 247. The proposed new Part 247 would consist of two subparts: Subpart A
-- General, which included the general requirements of RCRA section 6002 and definitions,
and Subpart B -- Item Designations (see 59 FR 18862; April 20, 1994). As explained in the
preamble to the proposed CPG, EPA did not seek comment on the existing item designations
for paper and paper products, re-refined lubricating oil, building insulation, cement and
concrete containing fly ash, or retread tires.
The legal basis, methodology, and factual conclusions that formed the basis of the
proposal were described in substantial detail in the notice of proposed rulemaking (see 59 FR
18853 - 18882). In addition, EPA published a listing of additional documents that supported
the proposal and that were made available for review in EPA’s RCRA Information Center
(see 59 FR 18885 - 18886). Interested persons were invited to participate in the rulemaking
by submitting written comments by June 20, 1994.
The following sections of this document describe the requirements of RCRA section
6002 and Executive Order 12873; explain the basis for designating specific products as
procurement items subject to RCRA section 6002 describe the revisions to the building
insulation guideline, and explain how the CPG incorporates and recodifies the existing five
guidelines into a revised 40 CFR Part 247. A related background documents entitled "RMAN
3
for Items Designated in the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline -- Supporting Analyses,”
discusses EPA’s recommendations for implementing RCRA section 6002 with respect to
procurement of the designated items and also provides information regarding the price.
availability, and performance of these items.
For the convenience of the reader, Table 2 lists acronyms referenced throughout this
document.
Table 2
Commonly Referenced Acronyms
4
A. Materials in Solid Waste
In the proposed rule, EPA included a discussion of the materials found in solid waste
(see 59 FR 18854-18856). EPA received one set of substantive comments on this discussion
and has incorporated the commenter’s information into this section of the document. In
addition, the Agency has updated the data in this section to reflect those published in
‘Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update," (EPA530R-94-042) and other information, sources. As discussed in section II.E of this document,
RCRA section 6002 provides criteria for EPA to consider when selecting items for
designation. One of these criteria is the impact of procurement of the item on the solid
waste stream. EPA’s designation of an item should promote the statute’s underlying
objective of using the stimulus of government procurement to foster markets for items
containing materials recovered or diverted from solid waste. Consistent with this objective,
each of the items that EPA designates is made with one or more materials recovered or
diverted from solid waste. This subsection briefly discusses these materials and, where
applicable, alternative uses for them.
Generally, solid waste has several components, such as municipal solid waste,
construction and demolition debris, and non-hazardous industrial waste. EPA issues a
biennial report characterizing the generation and recovery of municipal solid waste in the
United States. Similar national characterizations of the other components of non-hazardous
5
solid waste are unavailable, although some state and local governments have characterized
one or more of these other components within their jurisdiction. Under RCRA section 6002,
EPA considers materials recovered or diverted from any component of solid waste for
purposes of designating items containing recovered materials.
EPA’s latest municipal solid waste characterization study, which presents 1993 waste
generation and recovery data, addresses the following materials: paper and paperboard,
glass, metals, plastics, rubber and leather, textiles, wood, food wastes, yard trimmings,
miscellaneous inorganic wastes, and other materials. Table 3 shows the 1993 generation and
recovery of these materials. The largest components of the municipal solid waste stream are
paper and paperboard (37.6 percent), yard trimmings (15.9 percent), plastics (9.3 percent),
and food wastes (6.7 percent). Glass and wood wastes each account for 6.6 percent of the
municipal solid waste stream. Paper, paperboard, and yard trimmings alone accounted for
over 53 percent of the materials generated in 1993.
EPA’s existing procurement guidelines foster markets for several of the municipal
solid waste components identified in Table 3 -- paper and paperboard, rubber (tires), and
plastics and glass (used in building insulation) -- as well as used oil and fly ash generated by
coal burning utilities. The revisions and new item designations issued in the CPG address
paper, plastics, glass, yard trimmings, wood, rubber, and other materials.
Table 3
Materials Generation and Recovery in the U.S. Municipal Waste Stream, 1993
(In Millions of Tons)
6
Source:
“Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the U.S.: 1994 Update,” U.S.
EPA, EPA 530-R-94-642, November 1994.
1. Paper and Paperboard
As shown in Table 3, paper and paperboard are major components of the solid waste
stream. In 1993, the municipal waste stream included nearly 78 million tons of waste paper;
or 38 percent of total municipal solid waste generated. Paper waste includes office papers,
newspapers, corrugated containers and other paper packaging, and a mixture of other papers
(e.g., direct mail). In 1993, the United States generated nearly 13 million tons of
newspapers, over 7 million tons of office papers, and over 35 million tons of paper and
paperboard containers and packaging.
A significant portion of paper is recovered and used in the manufacture of new paper
and paperboard products. According to the American Forest & Paper Association (AFPA),
the American paper industry recovered nearly 40 percent of paper and paperboard generated
in the U.S. in 1993, or approximately 36 million tons. Of this, 28.9 million tons were used
in U.S. mills to make recycled paper and paperboard products, 1.15 million tons were used
in the manufacture of other products, and 5.9 million tons were exported Table 4 provides
the tonnage of various grades of paper and paperboard recovered in 1993, as reported by
AF&PA. These figures include pre-consumer materials (e.g., converting scrap, over issues,
etc.) which are not taken into account in the EPA figures for paper and paperboard shown in
Table 3.
7
Table 4
Recovery of Paper and Paperboard in 1993
(In Millions of Short Tons)
Source:
American Forest & Paper Association, 1994
In 1993, the American paper industry set a goal of recovering 50 percent of paper and
paperboard generated by the year 2000. The industry estimates that 78 percent of all paper
and paperboard recovered domestically in the year 2000 will be used in the manufacture of
new paper and paperboard, 7 percent will be used in other products, and 15 percent will be
exported, The industry projects that much of the growth in use of recovered paper will be in
containerboard (corrugated medium and linerboard) and tissue products, although use in
newsprint and printing and writing paper is expected to grow, as well.
In addition to use in new paper products, recovered paper and paperboard can be used
to make such items as hydraulic mulch and board products used in the construction industry
for insulation and structural applications. Increasing demand for products made with
recovered paper may help increase the supply of these products and can lead to an increase
in the price of these materials. For technical performance and economic reasons, the paper
industry is-not now capable of using 100 percent recovered paper in all of its products.
Also, despite the significant investment made by the paper industry over the last several
years in equipment and capacity to use recovered paper, it is still difficult to find markets for
some grades of recovered paper in some parts of the United States.
2: Plastics
Plastics in the waste stream include non-durable goods such as consumer packaging,
containers, toys, and housewares, durable goods such as furniture, appliances, and
computers; .and commercial/industrial goods such as pipe, cable, siding, and auto parts.
Plastics made up 9.3 percent by weight (19.3 million tons) of municipal solid waste
according to EPA’s 1994 characterization study. By volume, plastics were the second
8
highest component (23.9 percent) of municipal solid waste. The EPA characterization study
also showed that plastics were recovered at a rate of 3.5 percent by weight in 1993.
A study commissioned by the American Plastics Council (APC) reported that the 1993
recycling rate for postconsumer plastic bottles and rigid containers was 15.9 percent; the
total recycling rate for plastic packaging of the six major resin types was 6.9 percent. The
study was conducted by R.W. Reck and is entitled: “1993 National Post-Consumer Plastics
Recycling Rate Study." The results are. based on data compiled from 255 companies’
involved in the reclamation and export of postconsumer plastics. Information was compiled
from plastic reclaimers who carried out the last value-added step before remanufacture, and
plastics handlers, reclaimers, or brokers who were exporting the materials for recycling.
This study did not summarize the recycling results of non-packaging applications, and all the
numbers cited from this report refer to totals for packaging application only. According to
the study, the most commonly recycled postconsumer products are polyethylene terephthalate.
(PET) soft drink bottles, with a 41 percent recycling rate, and high density polyethylene
(HDPE) milk and water jugs, with a 24.3 percent recycling rate. Other postconsumer resins,
including polyvinyl chloride (PVC), low density polyethylene (LDPE) (including linear low
density polyethylene (LLDPE)), and polystyrene (PS) are recycled at rates lower than 1
percent; polypropylene (PP) bottles are recycled at a somewhat higher rate of 1.6 percent.
PET has the highest recycling rate of all postconsumer resins. The APC study
reported the 1993 recycling rate for postconsumer PET packagimg was 28 percent (447.8
million pounds). This rate reflects the high recycling rate for PET soft drink bottles, which
are the most widely recycled plastic product. Currently, the primary market for
postconsumer PET is fiber for use in products such as ski jackets, sleeping bags, and carpet.
Other markets for postconsumer PET include geotextiles, soft drink bottles, and household
product containers.
There is a large potential supply of HDPE from postconsumer sources, as well as
preconsumer sources. APC reported that 450.2 million pounds of postconsumer HDPE
packaging materials were recycled in 1992. The supply of postconsumer HDPE is mainly
from recycled milk and water jugs, detergent bottles and other household products bottles.
Other sources reported that 427.6 millionpounds of preconsumer (or post-industrial) HDPE
were recycled in 1990. The availability of postconsumer HDPE is expected to increase as
more communities include HDPE products in their recycling collection programs and as
improvements in recovered plastics processing are achieved.
There is also a supply of recovered PVC; although relatively small amounts of
postconsumer PVC are available. PVC bottles make up a small percentage of the consumer
container market and typically have not been collected in local recycling programs. APC
reported that 5.5 million pounds of postconsumer PVC packaging was recycled in 1993.
Other sources estimate that the amount of preconsumer recovered PVC were approximately
130.9 million pounds in 1990, and the. supply of preconsumer recovered PVC now is
expected to be greater due to increased diversion from the waste stream. Sources of
9
preconsumer PVC include industrial Scraps from the manufacture of vinyl siding, blister
packs and floor tiling. EPA was unable to obtain estimates of post-industrial plastics
recovery rates.
Currently, the prices of most recovered resins are not competitive with virgin resins;
thus, many communities are discouraged from including plastics in their collection programs.
Further, there are still many technical barriers to the efficient processing of recovered
plastics. For example, the various plastic resins are not mutually compatible, requiring that
they be separated during processing. The development of higher value end-markets for the
plastics that are currently being collected may off-set the costs of processing the recovered
plastic and encourage more communities to recover plastics from the waste stream, which, in
turn, will increase supply.
3. Glass
The glass found in municipal solid waste is primarily in the form of containers,
although glass is also found in durable goods such as furniture, appliances, and consumer
electronics. The chemical composition of glass varies with its use. For example, container
glass differs from glass used in automotive windshields. For this reason,’ glass from one
product may not be. used easily in the manufacture of other products.
in 1990, approximately 22 percent of glass containers were recovered for recycling,
with a 20 percent recovery rate for all glass in municipal solid waste. By 1993, 25 percent
of all glass containers manufactured and sold in the U.S. were recycled. If refillables are
counted, the glass recycling rate increases to 33 percent.
The major. market for recovered container glass is the glass container manufacturing
industry: There are 75 container plants in the U.S., but they are not distributed uniformly,
across the country. They are not now using all of the container glass being recovered.
A potential alternative market for recovered container and other glass is the fiberglass
insulation manufacturing industry. EPA’s 1989 building insulation products procurement
guideline included fiberglass insulation, but EPA did not recommend recovered materials
levels for this item. EPA now recommends recovered materials levels for fiberglass
insulation in order to foster use of recovered glass in this product. These recommended
levels can be found in the RMAN for the CPG, which was published in the notice section of
the FEDERAL REGISTER on the same date as the CPG.
4. Yard Trimmings
Roughly 47 million tons per year of yard debris (leave-s, lawn clippings, bush and tree
trimmings) and food scraps together comprise about 23 percent of municipal solid waste.
Yard materials alone comprise 16 percent of the municipal waste stream.
10
These materials can be composted to produce a usable product, rather than landfilled
or incinerated. Today, 26 states have laws or regulations that prohibit yard materials from
being landfilled.
5. Wood
EPA estimates that approximately 13.7 million tons of wood were generated as
municipal solid waste in 1993. Approximately 10 percent (1.32 million tons) was recovered
The sources of wood include furniture, miscellaneous durables, wood packaging (including
pallets), and other miscellaneous products.
Wood also is present in construction and demolition (C&D) debris -- materials
generated as a result of construction, renovation, or demolition of structures. C&D debris is
disposed in both municipal and C&D landfills. Generation of C&D debris fluctuates with
seasons, climate, weather, and the local and national economy. As a result, there are no
generally accepted estimates of C&D debris generation. According to one report, various
studies estimated generation rates ranging from 0.12 to 3.52 pounds/person/day.
“Construction Waste & Demolition Debris Recycling. . .A Primer,” prepared for
SWANA/EPA/MITE by Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc.]
Wood can account for as much as 30 percent of C&D debris, particularly if land has
been cleared for construction. According to one article, Maine and Oregon reported that
more than 97 percent of their wood waste, was landfilled as recently as 1988. (Gitlin, Lisa,
“Integrating Wood into the Recycling Loop,” Recycling Today, June 1991) However, as
landfill tipping fees increase and landfill space becomes limited in some states, wood
chipping and reclamation of wood from C&D is increasing. Communities with public or
private wood reclamation programs include Baltimore (the Loading Dock), the Bronx (Urban
Solutions), Berkeley (Urban Ore), San Jose, Chicago, Milwaukee, Portland, Cleveland, and
San Diego. Some of these programs reclaim parts for reuse, while others chip wood for new
applications, or both. Much of the wood is turned into fuel, compost, or mulch, including
hydraulic mulch.
Recovery of wood is increasing, however. In particular, in the West, there is
growing demand for secondary sources of wood fiber due to restrictions on timber
harvesting. In 1993, the Metro Portland Solid Waste Department (METRO) reported that
more than 216,000 tons of wood were generated in 1992, including wooden shipping
containers and pallets, untreated dimensional lumber and finishing pieces from C&D
activities, and large stumps from landclearing. METRO estimated ‘that 46 percent of these
materials were recovered, excluding wood that was salvaged for reuse.
Although a comprehensive ‘list of C&D debris recovery programs is not available,
published reports indicate that programs exist in all parts of the U.S. and that it is
.
technologically and economically feasible to recover wood wastes for use in such items as
11
board products, industrial boiler fuel, landscaping and hydraulic mulches, sludge bulking
media, and animal bedding.
6. Rubber
The predominant source of rubber in municipal solid waste is scrap tires. There are
approximately 2-3 billion scrap tires currently stockpiled across the U.S., and over 240
million more are generated annually. Improperly operated stockpiles can create serious
health and environmental threats from fires and insect- or rodent-borne diseases. Most states
now have scrap tire management legislation creating alternatives to tire stockpiling and
disposal. One of these alternatives is tire retreading, which is the focus of EPA’s 1988 tire
procurement guideline. Another alternative is to use crumb rubber, either alone or mixed
with plastics, to produce new products. Several of the items designated in the CPG contain
recovered crumb rubber from tires.
Crumb rubber, a fine granular or powdered material capable of being used to make
traffic cones and other products, is currently recovered from whole scrap tires using thermal,
chemical, and/or mechanical processing techniques. Crumb rubber is also derived from the
tire retreading process, when a worn tire tread is removed from a retreadable tire casing
during a buffing process before a new tread surface is affixed. Rubber materials derived
from this process are frequently referred to as “buffings” or “buffing dust.” Approximately
200 million tons of tire buffings are generated each year by the tire retreading industry in the
United States.
7. Engine Coolants
Annually, more than 200 million gallons of engine coolant are sold in the United
States. After purchase, engine coolant is diluted 50 percent with water before placement in
the engine. If the majority of engine coolant sold annually is replacing spent engine coolant
(rather than refilling leaking radiators), then 400 million ‘gallons of spent engine coolant
mixtures require disposal each year. Engine coolant is disposed by discharging it into a
sewage treatment system, dumping it on the ground, recycling it, or managing it as a
hazardous waste.
Some sewage treatment systems are designed in such a manner that they can treat
spent engine coolant without a problem. Increasingly, sewage treatment plants require
notification prior to or even restrict the discharge of spent engine coolant to their systems.
In addition, engine coolant can cause damage to a septic treatment system if it is flushed into
the system, and can cause harm to the environment if it is dumped on the ground.
Used engine coolant may become contaminated by heavy metals (predominately lead)
to such a degree that it is a hazardous waste according to EPA’s regulations. Some engine
coolant has failed the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) test because of
12
heavy metals and, therefore, is subject to regulation as a hazardous waste in accordance with
Federal and state hazardous waste management regulations.
The concentration of hazardous contaminants in spent engine coolant seems to depend
on many factors, including: the maintenance and use of the vehicle, the design of the
engine, and the amount of corrosion inhibitor additives. The amount of heavy metals in
spent coolant should greatly decrease in the next few years because of a trend in the
automotive industry to use aluminum and plastic radiators rather than brass. Use of plastic
and/or aluminum parts reduces or eliminates the need for lead solder, thereby reducing or
removing the source of lead and copper contamination. This industry trend may reduce, if
not eliminate, the issue of contaminated engine coolant and disposal as a hazardous waste.
Spent engine coolant can be recycled by removing contaminants and breakdown
products of the original ingredients and replacing corrosion inhibitors. Generators of spent
engine coolant can either purchase equipment to reclaim the fluid themselves or contract with
an engine coolant reclaimer.
8. Blast Furnace Slag
In the proposed CPG, EPA incorrectly characterized iron blast furnace and ground
granulated blast furnace slag (GGBF slag), giving the impression that all iron blast furnace
slag is ground granulated. Based on comments submitted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and
1
EPA’s ‘Report to Congress on Special Wastes from Mineral Processing,” EPA is providing
corrected information in this section.
Iron blast furnace slag is a by-product of the production of iron in a blast furnace.
Approximately 16 million tons of iron blast furnace slag are generated annually and are not
reused within the original manufacturing process. In the U.S., molten slag is cooled and
solidified by one of three processes, which result in either air-cooled, expanded, or
granulated slag. Approximately 90 percent of all iron blast furnace slag is air-cooled.,
According to the U.S. Bureau of Mines, 14.1 million metric tons of iron blast furnace slag
were sold or used in 1992 (12.7 million metric tons of @-cooled, and 1.4 million metric
tons of expanded and granulated slag).
Approximately 75 percent of iron blast furnace slag is used in aggregate applications
such as fill and road bases. Granulated slag can be ground and used in the manufacture of
cement, although it also is used as fill and road bases, as aggregate for concrete products,
and for soil conditioning.
1
“Report to Congress on Special Wastes from Mineral Processing,” Volume II:
Methods and Analyses, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, July
1990, Chapter 8.
13
EPA data indicate that at least three facilities store iron blast furnace slag in
stockpiles, slag pits, or temporary storage units. In 1988, over 14.6 million cubic meters of
iron blast furnace slag was accumulated in active waste management units. Some of this
material can be mined and utilized. In the Report to Congress, EPA indicated that in the
future, most primary iron producers in the U.S. are expected to modernize their blast
furnaces and install slag granulation facilities, resulting in greater availability of GGBF slag
for use in cement and concrete.
B. Benefits of Recycling
By all measures, the United States generates more solid waste (including municipal
solid waste, construction and demolition debris and non-harardous industrial waste) than any
other country in the world. While the rate of increase of waste generation has slowed over
the last 10 years, amounts generated -- as measured on a per capita or total basis -- continue
to grow. The occurrence of regional waste disposal capacity shortages and the difficulty in
siting new disposal facilities continue to plague state and local decision-makers responsible
for managing solid waste -- creating national concern. In RCRA, Congress acknowledged
the importance of recycling in helping to alleviate these problems and recognized that
recycling is not merely the collection of materials, but includes the manufacture of products
with these materials and the purchase of recycled content products by consumers.
RCRA section 6002 established the government buy-recycled program, which uses
Federal purchasing’ power to stimulate the demand for products made with recovered
materials. The statute does this by requiring EPA to issue guidelines to be used by Federal
agencies. to procure recycled content products. President Clinton’s Executive Order 12873
further bolsters the Federal government’s commitment to buy products containing recovered
materials by streamlining” the process used by EPA to designate these items.
Executive Order 12873 recognizes that the Nation’s interest is served when the
Federal government makes more efficient use of natural resources by. maximixing recycling
and preventing waste wherever possible. The E.O. also recognizes that the Federal
government should -- through a&-effective waste prevention and recycling activities -- work
to conserve disposal capacity, and serve as a model in this regard for private and other
public institutions. In some instances; the use of recovered materials in manufacturing can
result in significantly lower energy and material input costs than when virgin raw materials
are used. Aluminum recycling, for example, can save up to 97 percent of the energy
reqirements for making new aluminum, as compared to the use of bauxite. Use of
recovered materials may reduce the generation and release of air and water pollutants often
associated with manufacturing (including air emissions that contribute to the level of
“greenhouse gases” and ozone depletion). Air pollutant reductions of nearly 25 percent have
been associated with the manufacture of glass from recovered materials, while reductions
from the manufacture of steel and aluminum can he as high as 85 percent and. 95 percent,
respectively, when recovered materials are used. Additionally, water pollutant reductions in
the manufacture of steel and aluminum can be is high as 75 percent and 95 percent,
14
respectively, when recovered materials are used. Using recovered materials also reduces the
environmental impacts of mining, harvesting, and other extraction of natural resources, while
conserving non-renewable resources for future use. Recycling can also divert large amounts
of materials from landfill. This reduces the need to expand existing or, site new disposal
facilities, allowing local officials to devote more attention to health, education, and safety
issues.
Executive Order 12873 also points out that the use of recycled content products by the
Federal government can spur private sector development of new technologies and use of such
products, thereby creating business and employment opportunities that enhance local,
regional and national economies. Technological innovation associated with the use of
recovered materials can translate into economic growth and make American industry more
competitive in the global economy.
Both RCRA and the E.O. recognize the interdependence between buying recycled
content products and the success of recycling. For recycling to occur, industry must use
recovered materials as feedstock for the manufacture of new products. Despite the
environmental and economic efficiencies that can be realized by using recovered materials as
feedstock, a manufacturer’s primary responsibility remains to produce items that meet the
demand of the consumer, The Federal government, through its purchasing decisions as a
consumer, can play a key role in influencing manufacturer’s decisions on products made with
recovered materials. By purchasing products containing recovered materials pursuant to the
guidelines established under RCRA and Executive Order 12873, the Federal government has
the opportunity to increase markets for recovered materials and to contribute to an increased
level of recycling in this country. These guidelines also serve to stimulate the purchase of
recycled content products nationwide, since many state and local governments, as well as the
private sector, use these guidelines as a framework for their purchases.
C. Requirements
RCRA section 6002 and Executive Order 12873 specify requirements for the
procurement of products containing recovered materials. The requirements of RCRA section
6002 apply to “procuring agencies,” while the Executive Order requirements apply only to
Federal “Executive agencies.” The definition of “procuring agency” is discussed in section
V of this document, while “Executive agency” is defined in section 202 of Executive Order
12873.
1. RCRA Section 6002
RCRA section 6002 requires EPA to designate items that are or can be made with
recovered materials and to recommend practices to assist procuring agencies in purchasing
the designated items. Once an item is designated by EPA, procuring agencies that use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase the item are required to purchase. it composed of the
highest percentage of recovered materials practicable (and in the case of paper, the highest
15
percentage of postconsumer recovered materials), taking into consideration the limitations set
forth in section 6002(c)(l)(A) through (C) (i.e., competition, price, availability, and
performance). The requirement applies when a procuring agency purchases $10,000 worth
of a designated item or when the total cost of such items, or of functionally equivalent items,
purchased during the preceding fiscal year was $l0,000 or more.
RCRA section 6002(d)(2) requires that, within one year after EPA designates an item,
Federal agencies revise their specifications to require the use of recovered materials to the
maximum extent possible without jeopardizing the intended end-use of the item. Section
6002(d)(i) further requires Federal agencies responsible for drafting or reviewing
specifications to review all of their product specifications to eliminate both provisions
prohibiting the use of recovered materials and requirements specifying the exclusive use of
virgin materials. This latter revision process should have been completed by May 8, 1986.
Once EPA designates an item, responsibility for complying with RCRA section 6002
rests with the procuring agencies. For each item designated by EPA, RCRA section 6002(i)
requires each procuring agency to develop an affirmative procurement program, which sets
forth the agency’s policies and procedures for implementing the requirements of RCRA
section 6002. The program must assure that the agency purchases items composed of
recovered materials to the maximum extent practicable and that these purchases are consistent
with applicable provisions of Federal procurement law. In accordance with RCRA section
6002(i), the affirmative procurement program must contain at least four elements:
(1)
A recovered materials preference program;
(2)
An agency promotion program;
(3)
A program for requiring vendors to estimate and certify the recovered
materials content of their products and for reasonably verifying the estimates
and certifications, and
(4)
A program to monitor and annually review the effectiveness of the affirmative
procurement program.
Finally, RCRA section 6002(g) requires the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
(OFPP) to implement the requirements of RCRA section 6002 and to coordinate this policy
with other Federal procurement policies in order to maximize the use of recovered materials.
RCRA further requires OFPP to report to Congress every two’ years on actions taken by
Federal agencies to implement such policy.
2. Executive Order 12873
Executive Order 12873, entitled ‘Federal Acquisition, Recycling, and Waste
Prevention,” was signed by President Clinton on October 20, 1993. Section 502 of the
16
Order establishes a new, two-part process for EPA to use when developing and issuing the
procurement guidelines for products containing recovered materials, as required by RCRA
section 6002(e). The first part, the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline, involves
designating items that are or can be made with recovered materials, an activity requiring
rulemaking. As with the previous guidelines, the CPG was developed using formal noticeand-comment rulemaking procedures. The final CPG was developed under the procedures
established in the Executive Order and will be codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.
The second part, the Recovered Materials Advisory Notice, provides
recommendations to procuring agencies on purchasing the items designated in the CPG. The
E.O. directs EPA to publish the RMAN in the FEDERAL REGISTER for public comment.
The RMAN for items designated in the final CPG appears in the notice section of the
FEDERAL REGISTER. Because the recommendations are guidance, they will not be
codified in the CFR.
EPA is also required to provide guidance to Executive agencies on procuring
environmentally-preferable products. Section 503 of the Executive Order requires EPA to
develop and issue guiding principles that Executive agencies should use in purchasing
environmentally-preferable products. EPA is developing these guiding principles separately
from the CPG and RMAN and will provide an opportunity for the public to comment on
them.
Section 401 requires Executive agencies to consider the use of recovered materials
and other environmental factors in acquisition planning for all procurements, and in the
evaluation and award of contracts.
Section 402 directs the head of each Executive agency to implement the affirmative
procurement program requirements of RCRA section 6002(i) and to include in the affirmative
procurement programs a requirement that all purchases of EPA-designated items meet or
exceed the EPA-recommended levels. It further requires that agency affirmative
procurement programs encourage that (1) documents be transferred electronically, (2) all
government documents printed internally be printed double-sided, and (3) contracts, grants,
and cooperative-agreements issued after October 20, 1993, include provisions that require
documents to be printed double-sided on recycled paper that meets or exceeds the standards
established in the Executive Order or in future EPA Recovered Materials Advisory Notices.
Section 501 of the Executive Order requires Executive agencies to review and, where
applicable, revise their specifications, product descriptions, and standards to enhance Federal
procurement of products containing recovered materials. When agencies convert to
Commercial Item Descriptions (CIDs), they are required to ensure that the CIDs meet or
exceed the recovered materials requirements of the specifications or product descriptions that
they replace.
17
Section 504 requires Executive agency heads to purchase uncoated printing and
writing paper with a minimum of 20 percent postconsumer content beginning December 31,
1994, and 30 percent postconsumer content beginning December 31, 1998. In lieu of these
postconsumer content levels for paper, Section 504(c) of the Order allows Executive
agencies, under specific circumstances, to purchase printing and writing paper that contains
50 percent recovered materials. The levels contained in the Executive Order replace the
corresponding standards contained in EPA’s 1988 paper guideline. On March 15, 1995,
EPA issued a draft RMAN for paper products (see 60 FR 14182) which contains draft
revisions to EPA’s recommended recovered materials content levels for paper and paper
products.. The draft RMAN incorporates the recovered materials content levels required in
the Executive Order. Executive agencies should note, however, that, beginning December
31, 1994, the standards in the Executive Order are applicable to their paper purchases even if
EPA does not incorporate them into the paper guideline.
Section 505 further requires the General Services Administration and other Federal
agencies to revise their paper specifications to eliminate barriers, unrelated to performance,
to purchasing paper or paper products made by production processes that minimize emissions
of harmful by-products.
Section 506 reinforces the procurement guidelines for m-refined oil and retread tires
by requiring commodity managers to finalize specification revisions for the products and to
develop and issue specifications for tire retreading services. Once these specifications are
finalized, commodity and fleet managers are required to take affirmative steps to procure
retread tires and m-refined oil.
Section 602 of the Executive Order directs Executive agencies to set goals for
purchasing recycled and other environmentally-preferable products and to maximize the
number of recycled content products purchased, relative to non-recycled alternatives.
Finally, section 301 requires the Federal Environmental Executive to submit an
annual report to the Office of Management and Budget on the actions taken by agencies to
comply with the requirements of the Executive Order, including the affirmative procurement
program requirements set forth in RCRA section 6002. To enable the Federal Environmental
Executive to develop this report, Executive agencies are required to provide information on
their implementation actions.
3. Other Requirements and Policies
There are several other policies and procedures that may affect the procurement of
products containing recovered materials by Federal and other government agencies. For the
convenience of the reader, EPA has briefly summarized requirements and Policies set forth in
the Federal Acquisition Regulation, OFPP Policy Letter 92-4, and OMB Circulars A-102, A119, and A-131.
18
a. Federal Acquisition Regulation. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) (48
CFR 1) is the primary regulation used by Executive agencies in their acquisition of supplies
and services. Part 23 sets forth requirements and procedures for Federal agencies to use
when procuring EPA-designated items.
b. OFPP Policy Letter 92-4. OFPP’s Policy Letter 92-4, “Procurement of
Environmentally-Sound and Energy-Efficient Products and Services” (57 FR 53362),
establishes Executive branch policies for the acquisition and use of environmentally-sound,
energy-efficient products and services. In addition to reiterating the requirements of RCRA
section 6002, the Policy Letter requires Executive agencies to (1) identify and-procure
products and services that, all factors taken into consideration, are environmentally-sound
and energy-efficient, and (2) employ life cycle cost analysis to assist in making product and
service selections.
c. OMB Circular A-102. On October 14, 1994, OMB published revisions to OMB
Circular A-102, “Grants and Cooperative Agreements with, State and Local Governments”
(59 FR 52224). Paragraph 2(h) of the circular requires state and local government recipients
of Federal assistance funding to comply with RCRA section 6002;
d. OMB Circular A-119. OMB Circular A-119, “Federal Participation in the
Development and Use of Voluntary Standards” (54 FR 57645), sets forth policy for
Executive agencies to follow in working with voluntary standards bodies and in adopting and
using voluntary standards. Paragraph 7(a)(4) recommends that Federal agencies give
preference to adopting and using standards that ‘foster materials, products, systems, or
practices that are environmentally-sound and energy-efficient."
e. OMB Circular A-131. OMB Circular A-131, “Value Engineering” (58 FR 31056).
requires Executive agencies to use value engineering as a management tool to reduce
program and acquisition costs. Paragraph 8(b) requires agencies to develop guidelines for
both in-house personnel and contractors to identify programs/projects with the most potential
to yield savings from the application of value engineering techniques. Paragraph 3(b)(4)
further requires this guidance to ensure. that the application of value engineering to
construction and other projects/programs includes consideration of environmentally-sound and
energyefficient results.
D. Criteria for Selecting Items for Designation
RCRA section 6002(e) requires EPA to consider the following criteria when
determining which items it will designate:
(1)
Availability of the item;
(2)
Potential impact of the procurement of the item by procuring agencies on the
solid waste stream;
19
(3)
Economic and technological feasibility of producing the item; and
(4)
Other uses for the recovered materials used to produce the item.
EPA considered these criteria and also consulted with Federal procurement and
requirement officials to identify other criteria to consider when selecting items for
designation. Based on the information obtained from these sources, the Agency decided that
the limitations set forth in RCRA section 6002(c) should also be factored into its selection
decisions. "Section 6002(c) requires each procuring agency that procures an item designated
by EPA to procure the item composed of the highest percentage of recovered materials
practicable, white maintaining a satisfactory level of competition. The decision not to
procure an EPA-designated item containing recovered materials may be based only on the
following: (1) the item is not reasonably available within a reasonable period of time; (2) the
item fails to meet the performance standards set forth in the agency’s specification; or (3) the
item is available only at an unreasonable price. EPA recognized that these limitations could
restrict procuring agencies from purchasing EPA-designated items with recovered materials
content, and thereby, could limit the potential impact of an individual item designation. For
this reason, EPA considered the limitations cited in RCRA section 6002(c) along with the
statutory criteria when selecting items for designation in the CPG. EPA believes that the
criteria of RCRA section 6002(c) fit within the considerations of availability called for by
RCRA section 6002(e).
Thus, the Agency developed the following considerations to use as guidance when
selecting items for designation: use of materials found in solid waste, economic and
technological feasibility and performance, impact of government procurement, availability
and competition, and other uses for recovered materials.
1. Use of Materials Found in Solid Waste
All items that EPA designates in the CPG are manufactured with materials recovered
or diverted from the solid waste stream. These include both materials recovered or diverted
from municipal solid waste and materials recovered or diverted from other solid waste
streams, such as construction and demolition debris other non-hazardous industrial waste
streams. Once recovered or diverted, these materials are reclaimed and refined,
disassembled and remanufactured, or separated and processed for use as feedstock to
manufacture a new product.
The potential impact that procuring agencies may have on the solid waste stream by
procuring an EPA designated item varies depending on the sophistication of the process used
to recover or refine the material used in the manufacture of the item and on the recovered
materials content of the final product. Additionally, although designating a single item may
not have a significant impact on the amount of solid waste recovered or diverted from the
waste stream, EPA believes that designating several items made from the same recovered
20
material can lead to the diversion of substantial quantities of that material from the waste
stream.
Information on the materials used to produce each item EPA has designated is
presented in subsection a, “Use of Materials, in Solid Waste,” in the individual item
designation discussions in sections X-XVI of this document.
2. Economic and Technological Feasibility and Performance
Before selecting an item for designation, EPA determines that, based on its market
research, it is economically and technologically feasible ‘to use recovered materials to
produce the item. EPA uses several indicators in making this determination. Availability of
the item in the marketplace and procurement of the item by Federal and/or other government
agencies are primary indicators that it is economically and technologically feasible to produce
that product with recovered materials content. Other indicators include ability of the item to.
meet performance specifications, general acceptance of the item by consumers and
purchasers, and use of recovered feedstock by manufacturers.
RCRA directs EPA to “designate items that are or can be produced with recovered
materials and whose procurement by procuring agencies will carry out the objectives of
section 6002” of RCRA. This being the case, there may be instances where a particular item
is not currently being made with recovered materials content, but a similar item is. In those
cases where the Agency believes that there are no technical reasons that prevent an item from
being manufactured with recovered materials, and there is a demonstrated use of recovered
materials in a similar item, EPA may also consider designation of the item that currently
does not contain recovered materials.
Prior to selecting an item for designation, EPA also considers the ability of the item
to meet the standards, specifications, or commercial item descriptions established by Federal
agencies or national standard-setting organizations.
Information on the economic and technological. feasibility of producing each item EPA
has designated, includingthe availabilityof the item and the number of manufacturers that
produce the item, the ability of the item to meet Federal or national specifications, the
recovered materials content levels used by manufacturers to produce the item, and other
information relevant to the economic and technological feasibility of producing and using the.
item, is discussed in subsection b, “Technically Proven Uses,” in the individual item
designation discussions in sections X-XVI of this document.
3. Impact of Government Procurement
The impact of government procurement of products containing recovered materials is
a combination of (1) direct purchases by Federal agencies, (2) purchases made by state and
local agencies using Federal monies, and (3) purchases made by contractors to these
21
government agencies. Thus, when considering items for designation, EPA examines whether
government agencies and their contractors purchase the items.
Government procurement also has an impact that extends far beyond the Federal,
state, and local levels. As encouraged in RCRA and Executive Order 12873, the Federal
government often serves as a model for private and other public institutions. Because of this
secondary effect, EPA includes items that are. not unique to or primarily used by government
agencies. Many of the items that EPA has designated are selected because they have broad.
application both in government and in the private sector.
Information on the potential impact of government procurement for each item EPA is
designating is presented in subsection c, “Impact of Government Procurement,” in the
individual item designation discussions in sections X-XVI of this document.
4. Availability and Competition
The items EPA has designated are available either from national distributors or
manufacturers or from regional or local sources. The relative availability of an item
influences the ability of a procuring agency to secure an adequate level of competition when
procuring an item. In the event that a satisfactory level of competition is unattainable, a
procuring agency may elect to ‘waive the requirement to purchase an EPA-designated item
with recovered materials content based on the limitations listed in RCRA section 6002(c).
Information on the availability of each item EPA has designated, including the
number of manufacturers that produce the items, is presented in subsection b, “Technically
Proven Uses,” in the individual item designation discussions in sections X-XVI of this
document.
5. Other Uses for Recovered Materials
In selecting items for designation, EPA also considers the following: (1) the
possibility of one recovered material displacing another recovered material as feedstock,
thereby resulting in no net reduction in materials requiring disposal; (2) the diversion of
recovered materials from one product to another, possibly creating shortages in feedstocks
for one or both products, and (3) the ability of manufacturers to obtain recovered materials in
sufficient quantity to produce the item under consideration.
While other uses for recovered materials are a consideration, they were not a
determining factor when selecting items for designation in the CPG because. there is a need
for additional markets for all recovered materials used to manufacture the designated items.
22
6. Other Considerations
As mentioned in the introduction to section II.D, EPA also considers price as a factor
affecting the availability of an item. However, the price of products, whether virgin or
recycled, is affected by many variables, including availability and costs of material
feedstocks, energy costs, labor costs, rate of return on capital, transportation charges, and
the quantity of the item ordered. In addition, price may vary depending on whether the
product is a common stock item or requires a special order. Price can also be affected by
the geographical location of the purchaser because some products may not be uniformly
available throughout the United States. Therefore, the best sources of current price
information for quantities of items to be delivered to specific locations are the manufacturers
and vendors of the recycled content products.
Relative prices of recycled content products compared to prices of comparable virgin
products also vary. In many cases, recycled content products may be less expensive than
their virgin counterparts. In other cases, virgin products may have lower prices than
recycled content products. However, other factors can also affect the price of virgin
products. For example, temporary fluctuations in the overall economy can create
oversupplies of virgin products, leading to a decrease in prices for these items. Therefore,
while price is a consideration, in most cases, it is not a determining factor when selecting
items for designation. It becomes a determining factor only when EPA obtains evidence that
the relative price of an item with recovered materials content is significantly higher than the
relative price of a comparable virgin product. For this reason, EPA did not address price in
the individual item designation discussions presented in sections X-XVI of this document.
ERA also considered the feasibility of designating experimental or developmental
products containing recovered materials. In the Agency’s experience, such designations do
not result in government procurement of products containing recovered materials, because the
items are not reasonably available, or there is only one source; this leads to an unsatisfactory
level of competition. For this reason,- EPA does not intend to designate experimental or
developmental products until it, can be shown that they meet all of EPA’s selection criteria,
as described above. (For additional discussion of designating experimental and
developmental products, see EPA’s comments on General Accounting Office Report No. B251080, “Solid Waste: Federal Program to Buy Products with Recovered Materials Proceeds
Slowly.”)
E. Methodology for Selecting Items for Designation
As described in section II.C.2, Executive Order 12873 directs ERA to promulgate a
Comprehensive Procurement Guideline and related Recovered Materials Advisory Notice.
This section explains the methodology ERA used to select items for designation and the
rationale used to develop the recommended recovered materials content levels for the items
designated in the CPG. The recommended recovered materials content levels can be found
in the related RMAN.
23
1. Selection of Items for Designation
EPA began its efforts to develop the CPG and RMAN by first creating an interagency
working group consisting of technical, research and development, environmental, and
procurement officials from several of the major Federal purchasing agencies.
The Agency then compiled a broad list of potential products made from recovered
materials. In developing this list, EPA initially consulted publicly-available sources of
information including the “Official Recycled Products Guide,” GSA’s “Recycled Products
®
Guide,” the McDonald’s Corporation’s “McRecycle Database,” and over 50 other
information sources. To this list, EPA added items which, prior to the issuance of the
Executive Order, EPA considered designating (i.e., fiberboard, hydraulic mulch, plastic
pipe, geotextiles, and compost). EPA next distributed its broad list of candidate items to the
working group for review and evaluation. Working group representatives, based on their
experiences in setting product specifications and their knowledge of the marketplace and the
procurement practices of their respective agencies, identified other items to be added to the
candidate list of products. Finally, based on a review of publicly-available information,
EPA’s own product research, and input from the working group, EPA developed a final
candidate list.
Next, for each item on the final candidate list, EPA considered the following
questions that relate to the key criteria described previously in section II.D:
(1) Use of Materials in Solid Waste
¡
Is the item made using a material that represents a significant portion of
the solid waste stream or presents a solid waste disposal problem?
(2) Economic and Technological Feasibility and Performance
¡
Does the item perform as well as necessary to meet a procuring
agency’s needs?
¡
Are there standards or specifications that would enable a procuring
agency to buy the item containing recovered materials?
¡
Is the item available at a reasonable price considering normal market
fluctuations?
(3) Impact of Government Procurement
¡
Is the item purchased in appreciable quantities by the Federal
government or by state and local governments?
24
(4) Availability and Competition
¡
Is the item available from an adequate number of sources to ensure
competition?
¡
Is the item generally available, rather than available in a limited market
area?
For each item meeting one or more of these key criteria, EPA sought additional
information and conducted further analyses to determine whether the item met all or most of
the remaining criteria. For some items, EPA was unable to obtain sufficient information to
determine if all or most of the criteria were met. Thus, baaed on product reviews and,
additional analyses, EPA developed three product lists: (1) a list of items that EPA proposed
for de&nation on April 20, 1994, (2) a list of items that, might be designated in the near
future pending receipt of additional information and further review, and (3) a list of item’s
that EPA determined cannot be designated at this time because of limited availability,
unreasonable price, or the inability of manufacturers at this time to produce these items with
recovered materials content. As previously noted, however, there may be cases in which a
particular item is not currently being made with recovered materials, but a similar item is.
In those cases where EPA believes there is no technical reasons that prevent an item from
being made with recovered materials and there is a demonstrated use of recovered materials
in a similar item, the Agency may consider designating that item even though it is not
currently being made with recovered materials.
The items in the first list are discussed in detail in sections X-XVI of this document.
For items on the second list, EPA requested additional information in the proposed CPG (see
59 FR 18881, April 20, 1994). The Agency will consider this information in developing
future updates to the CPC. These items are discussed in section XVII. Items included in the
third list published in the proposed CPG, those that cannot be designated at this time, are
discussed in section XVIII.
2. Recommended Recovered Materials Content Levels
For most of the items designated in the CPG, EPA is recommending recovered
materials content levels. These recommendations are contained in the related RMAN, which
was also published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on the same date as the CPG. The purpose
of the recommendations is to assist procuring agencies in fulfilling their obligations under
RCRA section 6002 and Executive Order 12873 to purchase designated items composed of
the highest percentages of recovered materials practicable. To determine the percentages of
recovered materials contained in the designated items, EPA identified and evaluated pertinent
data sources and information. First, for the items EPA previously considered for
designation, EPA reviewed the previously-gathered data. EPA also gathered and evaluated
publicly-available information and information provided by other Federal agencies.
Additionally, in the case of items considered for designation subsequent to issuance of the
25
Executive Order, EPA reviewed and evaluated information obtained from product
manufacturers. Based on this information, EPA established a range of recovered materials
content levels within which each of the designated items is available. In establishing the
range, EPA’s objective was to ensure the availability of the item, while challenging
manufacturers to increase their use of recovered materials.
EPA believes that a range of content levels is appropriate at this time for three
reasons. Fist, EPA maintains only limited information on recovered materials content levels
for the newly-designated items. Second, rather than being purchased centrally, many of the
newly-designated items will be purchased locally, meaning that the recovered materials
content of these designated items is likely to vary substantially, making it problematic to
recommend a single content level at this time. Third, the Executive Order directs EPA to
propose a Recovered Materials Advisory Notice that presents ‘the range of recovered
materials content levels within which the designated recycled items are currently available.”
In recommending a range, EPA believes that it is providing sufficient information to enable
procuring agencies to establish appropriate procurement specifications for purchasing the
newly-designated items.
It is EPA’s intention to provide procuring agencies with the best and most current
information available to assist them in fulfilling their statutory obligations under RCRA
section 6002. To do this, EPA will monitor the progress made by procuring agencies in
purchasing designated items with the highest recovered materials content practicable and
revise the recommended content ranges accordingly. Revisions to recovered materials
content ranges will be published in an RMAN. EPA anticipates that, over time, the
recommended ranges will narrow.
In the RMAN, EPA also increased the recommended recovered materials content
level for rock wool insulation and added recommended content levels for fiberglass
insulation. Roth items were designated in the existing building insulation guideline (40 CFR
Part 248).
In previous procurement guidelines,. EPA, recommended a single content level for
each designated item. When issuing changes to these recommendations, in those instances
where there is sufficient information on current manufacturing practices to determine that a
single recovered materials content level is appropriate (e.g., rock wool insulation), EPA will
recommend one. In other instances, EPA will recommend a range of recovered materials
content levels (e.g., for fiberglass insulation).
The Agency received a number of comments on the recommended recovered materials
content levels in the draft RMAN. These comments and then Agency’s responses are
presented in a document entitled “RMAN For Items Designated in the Comprehensive
Procurement Guideline - Supporting Analyses.” A copy of this document has been placed in
the RCRA public docket.
26
3. Updates of the CPG and RMAN
Section 502 of Executive Order 12873 directed EPA to quickly propose a list of items
that are available with recovered materials content and to recommend recovered materials
content levels for these items. As described above, EPA relied on a streamlined process for
conducting research and obtaining product information. To meet the 180-day deadline in the
Executive Order, EPA determined that it would be necessary to rely on information already
in its possession or readily available. Therefore, EPA focused its efforts on obtaining
publicly-available information, and information that EPA could quickly obtain from other
Federal agencies.
The E.O. requires EPA to update the CPG annually. EPA will also update the
RMAN periodically to reflect changes in market conditions. In the proposed CPG, the
Agency announced it would establish a process for the public to suggest items for
consideration and to provide information on products made from recovered materials. The
proposal also solicited public comment on possible options for increasing public participation
in developing updates to the CPG and RMAN. EPA did not receive any comments
specifically relating to this issue. EPA intends to establish such a process and issue a future
FEDERAL REGISTER notice that will describe this process and provide information on how
the public can participate.
III. AGENCY’S RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
EPA requested information and comment throughout the proposed CPG. In general,
the Agency requested comments on (1) the items selected for designation; (2) the items
selected for potential future designation; and (3) the accuracy of the information presented in
the proposed item designations themselves. Requests for specific comments and information
were included in the narrative discussions for each of the items proposed for designation.
EPA received over 300 comments. The commenters represented state agencies, local
governments, product manufacturers, product users, Federal agencies, public interest groups,
waste management companies, and members of Congress. EPA carefully considered all of
these comments in developing the final CPG. A summary of the comments, including those
on specific item designations and the Agency’s responses are provided in the sections that
follow. A copy of all comments received by the Agency have been placed in the public
docket.
27
IV. CONSOLIDATION OF PROCUREMENT GUIDELINES INTO 40 CFR PART 247
A. Overview of Consolidated Provisions
Currently, EPA’s five existing procurement guidelines are codified in 40 CFR Parts
248, 249, 250, 252, and 253. In addition, 40 CFR Part 247 contains general guidance for
purchasing products containing recovered materials; however, Part 247 predates the 1984
amendments to RCRA and, therefore, does not address the statutory provisions requiring
agencies to establish affirmative procurement programs.
In the April 20, 1994 proposed rule, EPA proposed to delete the outdated general
guidance in Part 247 and to consolidate the existing five guidelines and new item
designations into a new Part 247. (See 59 FR 18862.) The Agency did not receive any
public comments on these proposed changes and, therefore, is finalizing the consolidation of
the guidelines into 40 CFR Part 247 as described below. This consolidated Part 247
supersedes the previous Parts 248, 249, 250, 252, and 253.
The new Part 247, Comprehensive Procurement Guideline, contains two subparts:
Subpart A - General, which includes the requirements of RCRA section 6002 and definitions,
and Subpart B - Item Designations. This consolidation allows EPA to (1) specify the
statutory requirements once, instead of repeating them in each individual guideline, (2) define
all applicable terms in one subpart, instead of in each individual guideline, and (3) provide
procuring agencies with one, central list of the designated items. Consolidating these
provisions into one Part will make them easier for procuring agencies to locate and use. In
addition, each of the five existing guidelines contains general sections addressing its purpose,
scope, and applicability. The applicability sections of the guidelines do not contain identical
text, which has created confusion among procuring agencies in the past. By consolidating
the procurement guidelines into one Part, EPA will be avoiding duplication and ambiguity.
RCRA section 6002 and Executive Order 12873 require agencies to establish
affirmative procurement programs for items designated by EPA. In addition, section 6002
requires agencies to review their specifications for designated items and revise them as
necessary to permit the use of recovered materials to the maximum extent practicable. These
requirements were explained in each of EPA’s earlier guidelines and are now found in
Subpart A of 40 CFR Part 247. Subpart A also contains applicable definitions found in
RCRA, definitions used in the five existing procurement guidelines, and definitions for the
items that EPA designates, including those being issued in today’s final rule.
Subpart B of the new Part 247 contains EPA’s designated list of items that are or can
be made with recovered materials. The items are grouped into eight product categories:
paper and paper products, vehicular products, construction producta, transportation products,
park and recreation products, landscaping products, non-paper office products, and
miscellaneous products. The first category contains the designation of paper and paper
products, while the existing designations of lubricating oil containing re-refined oil and
28
retread tires are found in the vehicular products category, and the existing designations of
cement and concrete containing fly ash and building insulation products containing recovered
materials are included in the construction products category.
B. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
No commenters opposed the consolidation of the five existing procurement guidelines
previously codified in 40 CFR Parts 248, 249, 250, 252, and 253 into a new Part 247.
Additionally, no one opposed the deletion of the outdated general guidance previously
contained in 40 CFR Part 247.
V. PURPOSE, SCOPE, AND APPLICABILITY
Subpart A of Part 247 as amended by the CPG, is primarily a consolidation of the
general provisions of the five existing guidelines. In the following sections, EPA discusses
the provisions of Subpart A as amended, identifying which regulatory provisions and
preamble discussions are repeated from earlier procurement guidelines and which are new
provisions being finalized by the CPG.
A. Purpose and Scope
Section 247.1 as amended by the CPG, is primarily a consolidation of the purpose
and scope sections of the five existing procurement guidelines. In addition, paragraph (b)
references the Recovered Materials Advisory Notice, consistent with the procurement
guidelines process established by E.O. 12873.
B. Applicability
Section 247.2 as amended by the CPG, is a consolidation of the applicability sections
of the five existing procurement guidelines. This section of the document addresses who is a
“procuring agency’ and to which purchases the statutory requirements apply. Most of the
following discussion is repeated from the preambles of the five existing procurement
guidelines for the convenience of the reader. The only change is in Subsection 2, which is
new and responds to concerns raised by other Federal agencies regarding the applicability of
RCRA section 6002 to private party recipients of Federal monies other than through
contracts.
1. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
The Agency received a number of comments on the Purpose, Scope, and Applicability
of the procurement guidelines.
29
/
a. Applicability to leases. One commenter inquired about the applicability of RCRA
section 6002 to designated items that are leased rather than purchased by a procuring agency.
Section 6002 applies to “any purchase or acquisition" in excess of $10,000 by a
procuring agency. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) defines “acquisition” to
include the acquiring of supplies or services (including construction) by means of a lease (48
CFR Section 2.101). Therefore, RCRA section 6002 and the procurement guidelines
developed under its authority apply to a procuring agency’s lease contracts for designated
items. Under the definition of "procuring agency," lessor contractors ‘are subject to the
section 6002 requirements for work performed under the lease contract.
b. Applicability to contractors. Commenters inquired when RCRA section 6002
applies to contractors.
The requirements of RCRA section 6002 apply to contractors in the following
circumstances. A contractor must comply with section 6002 with respect to work performed
under the contract if the contractor is (1) contracting with a Federal agency or a state agency
which is using, appropriated Federal funds for a procurement and (2) purchasing or acquiring
a designated item whose purchase price exceeds $10,000 or the quantity of which purchased
in the previous year was $10,000 or more.
Under both circumstances, it is immaterial for purposes of the $10,000 threshold
whether the contractor purchased or acquired the designated items as a “procuring agency”
(with respect to work performed under a contract with a Federal or state agency) or in its
private capacity. All the purchases of a designated item should be aggregated in order to
determine whether the $10,000 threshold for section 6002 applicability is met. However, the
obligations of section 6002 are prospective. The contractor must determine whether the
$10,000 threshold is met only after it, is a “procuring agency.” That is, purchases exceeding
the $10,000 threshold in the year prior to the year in which a contractor becomes a
“procuring agency” do not trigger section 6002(a) requirements. Furthermore, white the
contractor is subject to the section 6002 requirements once it exceeds the threshold, those
requirements apply only with respect to work-performed under the contract (i.e., when
supplying the designated item to any state or Federal agency).
For example, in Year One; Contractor X contracts to supply $500 of hydraulic mulch.
to a state. agency using appropriated Federal funds to purchase the hydraulic mulch.
Therefore, in Year One, Contractor X is a ‘procuring agency.” During Year One,
Contractor X also purchases hydraulic mulch for its own use and to supply the requirements
of its other customers, with total purchases of hydraulic mulch exceeding $10,000. In Year
One, while Contractor X is a procuring agency, Contractor X is not subject to the section
6002 requirements for hydraulic mulch supplied to the state agency because the contract price
does not exceed $10,000. In Year Two, Contractor X is subject to section 6002
requirements for hydraulic mulch provided to the state agency for the procurement regardless
30
of the amount of the contracted purchase, because, while a “procuring agency” in Year One,
it purchased in excess of $10,000 of hydraulic mulch.
In another example, in Year One, Contractor Y purchases $10,000 of hydraulic mulch
but none was purchased on behalf of a government agency using appropriated Federal funds.
In Year One, Contractor Y is not a procuring agency. In Year Two, Contractor Y contracts
to supply less than $10,000 of hydraulic mulch to a state agency using appropriated Federal
funds for the purchase. In Year Two, Contractor Y is a procuring agency, but is not subject
to section 6002 requirements for its purchases of hydraulic mulch because it was not a
procuring agency during the previous year when it acquired in excess of $l0,000 of
hydraulic mulch.
2. Statutory Provisions
Many of the requirements of RCRA section 6002 apply to “procuring agencies,”
which are defined in RCRA section 1004(17) as “any Federal agency,’ or any State agency or
agency of a political subdivision of a State that is using appropriated Federal funds for such
procurement, or any person contracting with any such agency with respect to work
performed under such contract.” Under the statute, responsibility for complying with RCRA
section 6002 rests with each individual procuring agency.
Under RCRA section 6002(a), the procurement requirements apply to any purchase by
procuring agencies of an item costing more than $10,000 or when the procuring agencies
purchased $10,000 worth of the item or of functionally equivalent items during the preceding
fiscal year.. The requirements apply to both direct and indirect purchases.
3. Who is a Procuring Agency?
The statutory definition of procuring agency identifies three types of “agencies”: (1)
Federal agencies, (2) state or local agencies using appropriated Federal funds, and (3)
.
contractors. Based on the statutory language, EPA believes that government agencies and
their contractors are or can become “procuring agencies,” but private recipients of Federal
funds other than through contracts are not procuring agencies and, therefore, are not subject
to RCRA section 6002.
EPA concluded that, under the statutory definition, a Federal agency is always a
procuring agency because the requirements of RCRA section 6002 apply to Federal agencies
whether or not appropriated Federal funds are used for procurement of designated items. It
should be noted, however, that the requirements of section 6002 apply only when a Federal
agency procures a designated item. The statutory requirements do not apply to a Federal
agency when it simply disburses funds to a state or local agency because, in that instance, the
Federal agency is not purchasing or acquiring anything. In this case, the state or local
agency is a procuring agency and must comply with these guidelines if they use the
appropriated Federal funds for procurement of designated items,
31
The statutory definition of procuring agency also includes any person contracting with
a defined Federal, state, or local agency. A contractor is a “procuring agency” and subject
to section 6002 when procuring designated items for work performed under a contract with a
Federal agency, or a contract with a state or local agencies where appropriated Federal funds
are used.
Because RCRA is explicit in identifying only government agencies and their
contractors as “procuring agencies,” EPA concluded that private party recipients (e.g., nonprofit organizations, individuals) of Federal loans, grants, or funds under a cooperative
agreement are not procuring agencies. This is true whether the originator of the grant, loan,
or cooperative agreement is a Federal agency or a state or local agency recipient of Federal
funds. In new 247.2, EPA is including a new subparagraph (c)(2) regarding private party
recipients of Federal funds to reflect this revised interpretation of RCRA section 6002.
4. To Which Purchases Does Section 6002 Apply?
As previously noted, the following discussion is a consolidation of similar discussions
in the existing procurement guidelinesand is included for the convenience of the reader.
Purchases made as a result of a solicitation by procuring agencies for their own
general use or that of other agencies (e.g.;purchases by GSA’s Federal Supply Service) are
“direct” purchases. Purchases of items as part of a contract are also “direct” purchases.
The definition of “procuring agency” makes it clear that the requirements of section
6002 also apply to indirect “purchases,” i.e., purchases by a state or local agency using
appropriated Federal funds or, in some instances, its contractors. In other words, section
6002 applies to purchases of designated items meeting the $10,000 threshold made by states,
political subdivisions of states, or their con&actors.
However, the guideline does not apply to such purchases if they are unrelated to or
incidental to the Federal funding, i.e., not the direct result of the grant, loan, or funds
disbursement. For example, if an entity has a Federal grant or contract to do. research and
builds or expands a laboratory to conduct the research, the construction is incidental to the
grant or contract, as is the purchase of construction materials.
The guideline applies whenever Federal monies, including block grants, are used,
whether or not they are commingled with non-Federal funds.
5. What is the $10,000 Threshold?
As previously noted, the following discussion is a consolidation of similar discussions
in the existing procurement guidelines and is included for the convenience of the reader.
32
RCRA section 6002(a) provides that the procurement requirementsof the statute apply
(1) when the purchase price of an item exceeds $10,000 or (2) when the quantity of such
items or of functionally equivalent items purchased during the preceding fiscal year was
$10,000 or more. Thus, RCRA section 6002 clearly sets out a two-step procedure for
determining whether the $10,000 threshold has been reached. First, procuring agencies must
determine whether they purchased $10,000 worth of a designated item or functionally
equivalent items during the preceding fiscal year. If so, the requirements of section 6002
apply to all purchases of these items occurring in the current fiscal year. Second, if the
procuring agencies did not procure $10,000 worth of a designated item during the preceding
fiscal year, they are not subject to RCRA section, 6002 unless, in the current fiscal year, they
make a purchase of the item exceeding $10,000. The requirements of RCRA section 6002
then apply to the $10,000 purchase of the designated item; to all subsequent purchases of the
item made during the current fiscal year, regardless of size, and to all procurements of the
designated item made in the following fiscal year.
Section 6002(a) does not specify that the procurement requirements are triggered
when the aggregate quantity of items purchased during the current fiscal year is $10,000 or
more. Therefore, EPA does not believe that Congress intended to require procuring agencies
to keep a running tally during the year of procurements of designated items. Maintaining
such a running tally ‘would be very burdensome. Rather, procuring agencies need only
compute their total procurements of a designated item once at the end of the fiscal year and
only if they intend to claim an exemption from the requirements of RCRA section 6002 in
the following fiscal year.
Finally, Federal agencies should note that the requirements of RCRA section 6002
apply to each Federal agency as a whole. This point is particularly important in determining
whether the $10,000 threshold has been reached. During each fiscal year, each major
Federal agency as a whole, purchases; or causes the purchase of, more than $10,000 worth
of many of the designated items. Therefore, the requirements of section 6002 will apply to
all procurements of ‘these items by these agencies and their subunits.
a. Summary of comments and agency’s response. One commenter questioned EPA’s
interpretation of the applicability of the $10,000 threshold to Federal agencies as a whole.
The commenter stated that the definition of “procuring agency” is inconsistent with the
definition of a “procuring activity” as defined in the FAR.
The discussion of the $10,000 threshold in the proposed CPG was a consolidation of
similar discussions found in the preambles to the paper, oil, tires, and building insulation
procurement guidelines. EPA requested comment on this issue during the development of
those guidelines and, therefore, did not request comment on it in the proposed CPG.
However, to resolve any question about inconsistencies between the CPG and the
FAR, EPA notes that its interpretation that the $10,000 threshold applies to a Federal agency
as a whole stems from the RCRA definitions of “procuring agency’ and "Federal agency."
33
RCRA Section 1004(17) defines a procuring agency as “any Federal agency, ...” RCRA
Section 1004(4) further defines a Federal agency as “any department, agency, or other
instrumentality of the Federal government, including any Government corporation and the
Government Printing Office.” All of the entities described in the definition are “whole”’
agencies, and are therefore subject to the requirements of RCRA Section 6002, including the
$10,000 threshold.
Further, EPA does not believe that the FAR and RCRA definitions are inconsistent
because they define different terms. A “procuring activity” is vastly different from a
‘procuring agency.” EPA believes that if Congress had meant to apply the $10,000
threshold to a procuring activity, it would have done so.
VI. DEFINITIONS
Most of the definitions found in new
247.3 are the same as those used in the five
existing procurement guidelines. EPA has concluded that it is easier for procuring agencies
to use the definitions if they are limited to those terms used in the CPG (and do not include
any definitions. specific to the RMAN). Therefore, in the final CPG, the definitions section
contains only terms used in the CPG. The terms "recovered materials," “procuring agency,”
“person,” and “Federal agency” are defined the same as in RCRA. “Postconsumer paper”
has the same definition as used in EPA’s 1988 paper procurement guideline as derived from
the statutory definition of “recovered materials" applicable to paper and paper products.
Other terms are standard industry or purchasing definitions (e.g., purchasing, specification).
EPA requested comment on these definitions and the definition of “practicable’ during the
development of the existing five procurement guidelines and,, therefore, did not request
comment on them in the proposed CPG.
A. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
A commenter recommended that EPA revise the general definition of “postconsumer
material” to be consistent with the general definition of "recovered materials" found in
RCRA. Specifically, the definition of "postconsumer material" proposed in the CPG
included the phrase "has been discarded for disposal or recovery." The commenter
suggested that this phrase be replaced with “has been diverted or recovered from waste
destined for disposal." EPA agrees that the recommended phrase is more consistent with the
RCRA definition and also better reflects the fact that the material in question has been
recovered or diverted from the waste stream. In the final CPG, EPA revised the definition
of “postconsumer material” accordingly.
EPA also added the folding item-specific terms: hydraulic mulch, hydroseeding,
laminated paperboard, and structural fiberboard. They are based on industry definitions,
including ASTM or other standard specifications, or represent descriptions of the scope of
34
items being designated. EPA specifically requested, but did not receive, comments on each
of these definitions.
VII. THE AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT PROGRAM
RCRA section 6002(i) requires that, within one year after EPA designates an item,
each procuring agency purchasing more than $10,000 of that item, or functionally equivalent
items, in a fiscal year must establish an affirmative procurement program for that item.
("Procuring agency" is discussed in section V.B.3; $10,000 threshold is discussed in section
V.B.5) Section 402 of Executive Order 12873 reinforces this requirement and further
provides that Executive agencies "shall ensure that their affirmative procurement programs
require that 100 percent of their purchases of products meet or exceed the EPA guideline
standards," considering competition, price, availability, and performance.
An affirmative procurement program is an agency’s strategy for maximizing its
purchases of an EPA-designated item. The affirmative procurement program should be
developed in a manner that assures that items composed of recovered materials are purchased
to the maximum extent practicable consistent with Federal procurement law. RCRA section
6002(i) requires that, at a minimum, an affirmative procurement program consist of four
elements: (1) a preference program; (2), a promotion program; (3) procedures for obtaining
estimates and certifications of recovered materials content and, where appropriate, reasonably
verifying those estimates and certifications; and (4) procedures for monitoring and annually
reviewing the effectiveness of the affirmative procurement program. In addition, section 402
of Executive Order 12873 requires an agency affirmative procurement program to encourage
the electronic transfer of documents, the two-sided printing of government documents, and
the inclusion of provisions in contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements that require
documents to be primed two-sided on recycled paper.
In previous guidelines, EPA recommended that specific actions be. taken by requesting
officials, contracting officers, and architects and engineers when purchasing designated items.
In consulting with acquisition policy and requirements officials from several major Federal
agencies, EPA determined that these item-specific recommendations did not provide enough.
flexibility for procuring agencies to determine the appropriate delineation of responsibilities
for implementing the requirements of RCRA section 6002. Based on this information and
because of the broad array of products designated in the CPG, EPA will no longer make
specific recommendations for individuals within an agency to implement the requirements of
RCRA section 6002 and Executive Order 12873. Instead, EPA recommends that the
Environmental Executive within each major procuring agency take the lead in developing the
agency’s affirmative procurement program and in implementing the requirements set forth in
the CPG. This recommendation is consistent with the basic responsibilities of an Agency.
Environmental Executive as described in sections 302 and 402 of Executive Order 12873.
Section 302 charges each Agency Environmental Executive with coordinating all
environmental programs in the areas of acquisition, standard and specification revision,
35
facilities management, waste prevention, recycling, and logistics. Section 402(c) of the E.O.
further requires each Agency Environmental Executive to track and report, to the Federal
Environmental Executive, agency purchases of EPA-designated items. In the absence of such
an individual, EPA recommends that the head of the implementing agency appoint an
individual who will be responsible for ensuring the agency’s compliance with RCRA section
6002 and Executive Order 12873.
RCRA and the Executive Order require procuring agencies to establish affirmative
procurement programs for each item EPA designates. In fulfilling this requirement, EPA
recommends that each agency develop one comprehensive affirmative procurement program
with a structure that provides for the integration of new items as they are designated. EPA
encourages agencies to implement preference programs for non-designated items as well, in
order to maximize their purchases of recycled content products and, thereby, create markets
for additional recovered materials.
A. Specifications
RCRA sections 6002(d)(l) requires Federal agencies responsible for drafting and
reviewing specifications for procurement items purchased by Federal agencies to review and
revise their specifications and remove requirements specifying virginmaterials only or
excluding the use of recovered materials. This revision process should have been completed
by May 8, 1986. For items designated by EPA, section 6002(d)(2) directs Federal agencies
to revise their specifications to require the use of recovered materials to the maximum extent
possible without jeopardizing their intended end-use. For the items previously designated by
EPA (i.e.,, paper and paper products, re-refined lubricating oil, retread tires, building
insulation, and cement and concrete containing fly ash), procuring agencies were required to
have completed their revisions within one year after each item designation. For the new
items designated in the CPG, agencies must complete these revisions within one year after
the date of publication of the CPG, as required by RCRA section 6002(d)(2).
As discussed in section II.C.2 of this document, sections 501, 504, 505, and 506 of
Executive Order 12873 also address Federal specification requirements. Section 501 of the
Order requires Executive agencies to review and revise their specifications, product.
descriptions, and standards to enhance Federal procurement of products containing recovered
materials. When agencies convert to Commercial Item Descriptions, they are required to
ensure that the Commercial Item Descriptions meet or exceed the recovered materials
requirements in the specifications or product descriptions they replace.
B. Preference Program.
A preference program is the system by which an agency implementa its stated
“preference” for purchasing products containing recovered materials. RCRA section
6002(i)(3) requires procuring agencies to consider the following options when implementing
36
their preference programs: minimum content standards, case-by-case policy development, or
a substantially equivalent alternative.
To assist procuring agencies in establishing their preference programs, when EPA
designates an item, it examines these statutory options and recommends the approach it
believes to be the most effective for purchasing the designated item. Procuring agencies may
elect either to adopt EPA’s recommended approach or to develop their own approaches,
provided that, in accordance with section 402 of the Executive Order, the selected approach
meets or exceeds EPA’s recommendations.
1. Minimum Content Standards
The first approach specified in RCRA section 6002(i)(3) is the establishment of
minimum content standards. RCRA section 6002(i)(3)(B) requires that procuring agencies
establish minimum content standards requiring the maximum amount of recovered materials
content available for that item, without jeopardizing the intended end use of the item.
To assist procuring agencies with establishing their minimum content standards, EPA
recommends recovered materials content levels, where appropriate, for most of the items it
designates. EPA notes that under RCRA section 6002(i), it is the procuring agency’s
responsibility to establish minimum content standards, white EPA provides recommendations
regarding the levels of recovered materials in the designated items. To make it clear that
EPA does not establish minimum content standards for other agencies, EPA will no longer
refer to its recommendations as "minimum content standards," as was done in previous
guidelines. Instead, EPA will refer to its recommendations as "recovered materials content
levels," consistent with RCRA section 6002(e) and Executive Order 12873.
As required by E.O. 12873, EPA changed its approach to establishing recovered
materials content levels. For items designated in previous guidelines, with the exception of
retread tires, EPA recommended one recovered materials content level that represented the
national minimum levels for procuring agencies to use when requesting designated items.
EPA is now recommending recovered materials content ranges within which the items are
available. EPA recommends that procuring agencies use these ranges, in conjunction with
their own research into the recovered materials content of items available to them, to
establish their minimum content standards. In some instances, EPA will recommend one
level (e.g., 100 percent recovered materials), rather than a range, because the item is
universally available at the recommended level. The methodology that EPA uses to establish
recovered materials content ranges for the items that the Agency designates is described in
section II.E.
2. Case-by-Case Policy Development
The second approach specified in RCRA section 6002(i)(3) is case-by-case policy
development. RCRA section 6002(i)(3)(A) describes case-by-case policy development as ‘a
37
policy of awarding contracts to the vendor offering an item composed of the highest
percentage of recovered materials practicable,” subject to the limitations of RCRA section
6002(c)(1)(A) through (C) (i.e., competition, price, availability, and performance). The
case-by-case approach is appropriate where a procuring agency determines that the minimum
content standard it has established for a particular designated item is not appropriate for a
specific procurement action (i.e., the procuring agency is unable to aquire the item within
the limitations described in RCRA. The case-by-case approach allows a procuring agency to
specify different (usually lower) minimum content standards for specific procurement actions,
while still ensuring that the agency fulfills its responsibility to procure the designated item
containing the highest amount of recovered materials practicable.
This approach is not intended to obviate the need for an agency minimum recovered
materials content standard. It should be applied to singular procurement actions only where
the agency’s minimum content standard is unattainable. If a procuring agency determines
that it is consistently unable to procure an EPA-designated item using the minimum content
standard it establishes, then the agency should evaluate its needs and adjust its content
standard accordingly.
3. Substantially Equivalent Alternative
The thirdapproach specified in RCRA section 6002(i)(3) is a substantially equivalent
alternative to minimum content standards and case-by-case policy development. For some
items, the use of minimum content standards is inappropriate because the product is
remanufactured, reconditioned, or rebuilt (e.g., remanufactured toner cartridges). In these
instances, EPA recommends that procuring agencies use a substantially equivalent alternative.
For example, as discussed in the draft RMAN (see 59 FR 18865, April 20, 1994); in the
case of remanufactured toner cartridges, EPA recommends that procuring agencies establish
a two-pronged program consisting of (1) remanufacturing theirexpended toner cartridges and
(2) purchasing remanufactured toner cartridges when new cartridges are needed. Minimum
content standards ate inapplicable because the recovered material is the expended toner
cartridge, rather than the individuaI components used to produce a new cartridge. However,
in instances where the procuring agency is purchasing new toner cartridges made from
recovered materials (e.g., plastic); a minimum content standard would be appropriate.
4. Requirements for Contractors and Grantees
Government contractors and state and local government agency recipients of
appropriated Federal funds, including assistance funds, are also subject to the requirements
of RCRA section 6002. These requirements are applicable where the contractor or state or
local government agency uses appropriated Federal funds and purchases $10,000 worth of an
EPA designated item or purchased $10,000 or more of the item in the previous year.
Section V.B.2 describes the applicability of RCRA section 6002 to government contractors
and state and local government agencies in further detail.
38
5. Exceptions
A procuring agency may not always be able to purchase a designated item with
recovered materials content. RCRA section 6002(c)(1) allows a procuring agency to make an
exception to purchasing an EPA-designated item with recovered materials content based on
the following determinations:
(1)
The agency is unable to secure a satisfactory level of competition.
(2)
The item is not reasonably available within a reasonable period of time.
(3)
The item fails to meet the reasonable performance standards set forth in the
agency’s specification.
(4)
The item is available only at an unreasonable price.
Section 402 of Executive Order 12873 further requires that, if a procuring agency does not
purchase an EPA-designated item with recovered materials content, it must provide a written
justification specifying one or more of the exceptions listed above.
a. Price. In previous guidelines, EPA defined an unreasonable price as a price that is
greater than the price of a competing product made from virgin materials. EPA further
interpreted the reasonable price provision of RCRA section 6002(c)(1)(C) to mean that there
is no projected or observed long-term or average increases over the price of competing virgin
items. This interpretation is supported in the preamble to OFPP Policy Letter 924 (57 FR
53364), which provides that there is no legal mandate to provide a price preference for
products containing recovered materials over similar virgin products.
b. Competition. EPA recommends that determinations of “satisfactory” competition be
made in accordance with the procuring agency’s procurement requirements.
c. Availability and performance. Information on the economic and technological
feasibility of producing each designated item, including the availability and number of
manufacturers that produce the item, the ability of the item to meet Federal or national
specifications, the recovered materials content levels used by manufacturers to produce the
item, and other information can be found in the item-specific discussions in this document
and in the "RMAN for Items Designated in the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline supporting Analyses."
C. Promotion Program
RCRA section 6002(i)(2)(R) requires each procuring agency to adopt a program to
promote its preference to buy EPA-designated items with recovered materials content. The
promotion component of the affirmative procurement program educates staff and notifies an
39
agency’s current and potential vendors. suppliers, and contractors of the agency’s intention to
buy recycled content products.
In the previous guidelines, EPA targeted its recommendations for promoting the
affirmative procurement program at the agency’s vendors and contractors. EPA has
determined that the education of an agency’s employees is also an important part of the
promotion program. Therefore, EPA believes that an agency’s promotion program should
consist of two components: an internal promotion program and an external promotion
program.
1. Internal Promotion
There are several methods that procuring agencies can use to educate their employees
about their affirmative procurement programs. ‘These methods include preparing and
distributing agency affirmative procurement policies, publishing articles in agency newsletters
and publications, including discussions of an agency’s affirmative procurement program in
staff and technical manuals, and conducting workshops and training sessions to educate
employees about their responsibilities under an agency’s affirmative procurement program.
2. External Promotion
Methods for educating existing contractors and potential bidders of an agency’s
preference to purchase products containing recovered materials include publishing articles in
appropriate trade publications, participating in vendor shows and trade fairs, placing
statements in solicitations, and discussing an agency’s affirmative procurement program at
bidders’ conferences.
D. Estimation, Certification, and Verification
RCRA section 6002(i)(2)(C) requires the affirmative procurement program to include
procedures for estimating, certifying, and, where appropriate, reasonably verifying the
amount of recovered materials content utilized in the performance of a contract. RCRA
section 6002(c)(3) further provides “the contracting officer shall require that vendors (A)
certify that the percentage of recovered materiala to be used in the performance of the.
contract will be at least the amount required by applicable specifications or other contractual
requirements and (B) estimate the percentage of the total material utilized for the
performance of the contract which is recovered materials."
E. Procedures to Monitor and Review the Procurement Program
Procuring agencies should monitor their affirmative procurement programs to ensure
that they are fulfilling their requirements to purchase items composed of recovered materials
to the maximum extent practicable. RCRA section 6002(i)(2)(D) requires the affirmative
40
procurement program to include procedures for anually reviewing and monitoring the
effectiveness of an agency’s affirmative procurement program. Section 402 of Executive
Order 12873 requires the Environmental Executive of each Executive agency to track and
report on agency purchases of EPA-designated items. Additionally, RCRA section 6002(g)
requires the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) to submit a report to Congress
every two years on actions taken by Federal agencies to implement the affirmative
procurement requirements of the statute. Also, section 301 of Executive Order 12873
requires the Federal Environmental Executive to submit a report annually, at the time of
agency budget submission, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on Executive
agency compliance with the Order. In order to fulfill their responsibilities, EPA anticipates
that the Federal Environmental Executive and OFPP will request information from
appropriate Federal agencies on their affirmative procurement practices. Therefore, it is
important for agencies to monitor their affirmative procurement programs to ensure
compliance with RCRA section 6002 and Executive Order 12873.
In order to comply with the Executive Order, agencies will need to evaluate their
purchases of products containing recovered materials. This will also allow them to establish
benchmarks from which progress can be assessed. To evaluate their procurements of
products containing recovered materials, procuring agencies may choose to collect data on
the following:
(1)
The approximate percentages of recovered materials content in the items
procured or offered;
(2)
Comparative price information on competitive procurements;
(3)
The quantity of each item procured over a fiscal year;
(4)
The availability of each item with recovered materials content; and
(5) Performance information related to recovered materials content of an item.
EPA recognizes that a procuring agency may be unable to obtain accurate data for all
items designated by EPA. However, EPA believes that estimates will be sufficient to
determine the overall effectiveness of an agency’s affirmative procurement program.
F. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Administrative requirements. Several commenters expressed concern with the
administrative requirements associated with individual item designations. In particular, many
commenters objected to the requirement that procuring agencies develop affirmative
procurement programs for all designated items, including items that they may not purchase
or that they are unable to obtain with recovered materials content. In addition, a few
commenters questioned the benefit of developing an affirmative procurement program,
41
particularly the monitoring and reporting aspects, for items they already purchase with
recovered materials content.
In the proposed CPG (59 FR 18864, April 20, 1994), EPA recommended that
procuring agencies develop one comprehensive affirmative procurement program with a
structure that provides for the integration of new items as they are designated. EPA believes
that developing a single affirmative procurement program will substantially reduce procuring
agencies’ administrative responsibilities under RCRA.
EPA also recommends that if a procuring agency does not purchase a specific
designated item, it should simply include a statement in its preference program to that effect.
Similarly, if a procuring agency is unable to obtain a particular item for one or more of the
reasons cited in RCRA section 6002(c)(1), a similar statement should be included in the
preference program along with the appropriate justification.
For example, if a state agency procures cement and concrete using appropriated
Federal funds and has determined that ground granulated blast furnace slag is not available in
the state due to high transportation costs, then that state agency would include the following
or similar statement in its preference program:
The State currently is unable to use ground granulated blast furnace stag in cement
and concrete products due to the high transportation costs of this material. Therefore,
this State has-concluded that, based on RCRA section 6002(c)(1)(C), it is not required
to procure this material.
EPA notes that, in accordance with RCRA section 6002(i)(2)(D); it is the procuring
agency’s responsibility to monitor and regularly update its affirmative procurement program.
Should an item that was previously unobtainable become available, then the procuring agency
should modify its affirmative procurement program accordingly.
In addition, to meet the affirmative procurement requirements for items already
purchased, EPA recommends that a procuring agency note in its affirmative procurement
program which designated items. it already purchases. EPA further notes that because
Federal agencies are the only procuring agencies that are required to report under the statute,
there is no administrative burden on state and local agencies associated with recordkeeping.
Recordkeeping and reporting requirements are discussed in further detail in Section VII.F.
b. Exceptions to affirmative procurement. Two commenters requested that EPA
provided further information on the four exceptions to purchasing EPA-designated items.
Other commenters requested that EPA include a definition of "unreasonable price."
EPA has included these discussions in Section VII.C.5 above.
42
c. Certifications. One commenter requested that EPA include a recommendation that
procuring agencies, in complying with the certification requirement of RCRA section
6002(c)(3)(A), require that vendors submit certifications when offers are submitted.
Although EPA included such a recommendation in the preamble to the building
insulation guideline (54 FR 7351, February 17, 1989), the Agency now believes that it is
appropriate to leave the decision of when to obtain certifications from vendors to the
individual procuring agencies. Obtaining certifications are a standard part of procurement,
and contracting officers are in the best position to determine at what points in their
acquisition processes certifications are needed.
VIII. CATRGORIES OF ITEM DESIGNATIONS
To organize the designated items, EPA developed the following product categories:
paper and paper products, vehicular products, construction products, transportation products,
park and recreation products, landscaping products, non-paper office products, and
miscellaneous products. The categories were developed to describe the application of each
designated item..
¡
Paper and Office Paper Products - as defined in 40 CFR 247.3 (old 40 CFR
250.4(aa)). This category excludes paper and paper products used in
construction applications.
¡
Vehicular Products - products used in repairing and maintaining automobiles,
trucks, and other vehicles. Examples of vehicular products include lubricants,
bumpers, mud flaps, and engine coolant.
¡
Construction Products - products used in constructing roads and the interior
and exterior components of commercial and residential buildings.
¡
Transportation Products - products used for directing traffic, alerting drivers,
and containing roadway noise and pollution. Examples of transportation
products include safety cones, traffic signs, and sound barriers.
¡
Park and Recreation Products - products used in operating and maintaining
parks and recreational areas. Examples of perk and recreation products
include playground equipment and running backs.
¡
Landscaping Products - products used to contain, maintain, or enhance
decorative and protective vegetation or areas surrounding buildings and
roadways. Examples of landscaping products include compost, garden
implements, and landscape timbers.
43
¡
Non-Paper Office Products - equipment and accessories used by government
agencies and businesses to perform daily operational and administrative
functions of an office. Examples of non-paper office products include toner
cartridges, desktop accessories, and waste receptacles.
¡
Miscellaneous Products - includes all other products not covered by the
categories listed above.
No commenters opposed the item categories. In the final CPG, EPA used the
categories as proposed.
IX. PAPER AND PAPER PRODUCTS
As previously discussed in this document, EPA issued a paper procurement guideline
in 1988. The guideline establishes recovered materials content levels for various paper
products, including printing and writing papers. Section 504 of Executive Order 12873
establishes minimum content levels for specified uncoated printing and writing papers
purchased by Federal executive agencies. These levels replace EPA’s 1988 recommendations.
On March 15, 1995, EPA issued a draft Paper Products RMAN to revise the existing
procurement guideline for paper and paper products (see 60 FR 14182). That draft RMAN
incorporates the minimum content levels established by the Executive Order, recommends
recovered materials levels for other paper products, and revises some of the definitions used
in the 1988 guideline. In addition, the draft paper RMAN addresses a variety of issues that
have been raised as procuring agencies have implemented affirmative procurement programs
for paper products containing recovered materials. In the CPG, EPA includes the existing
paper and paper products designation and related definitions issued in 1988. The CPG will
be amended, as needed, to include any changes resulting from the issuance of the final paper
RMAN. EPA is not including any of the 1995 draft recommended recovered materials
Content levels for paper products in Part A of the RMAN because the Agency is still
accepting comments on them. When the final, paper Products RMAN is issued; the
recommendations will replace the recommendations made for paper products in Part A of the
RMAN.
Federal Executive agencies should note that, beginning December 31, 1994, the
recycled content levels in the Executive Order are applicable to their purchases of printing
and writing papers.
44
X. GENERAL COMMENTS APPLICABLE TO ITEM DESIGNATIONS
a. One commenter suggested that EPA designate items in a material neutral manner.
In other words, rather than designating items made of specific materials (e.g., “plastic” trash
bags), EPA should simply designate the items in generic terms (e.g., trash bags).
EPA believes that such an approach is not appropriate for all items. Under RCRA
section 6002(c)(1), each procuring agency which procures “any items” designated by EPA is
required to procure such items composed of the highest percentage of recovered materials
practicable. As a result, if EPA designates a generic category of items, procuring agencies
are obligated to try to purchase all items within that category containing recovered materials.
For example, when EPA designated “paper and paper products” or “building insulation’
products,” procuring agencies were obligated to purchase all types of paper products or.
building insulation containing recovered materials, even though EPA did not provide content
recommendations for all products within these categories. In other instances, where EPA is
not aware that items manufactured from other types of materials are made with or could
contain recovered materials, EPA has limited its designations so as not to create an
unnecessary burden on agencies to try to purchase an item that is not available. When EPA
learns that the generic item is being made with additional recovered materials, EPA will
evaluate the new information and consider amending the item designation accordingly.
In implementing this process for the items listed in the proposed CPG, EPA
sometimes had information on the availability of a particular item made with a specific
recovered material (e.g., plastic), but no information on the availability of the item made
from a different recovered material or any indication that it is possible to make the item with
a different recovered material. In these instances, EPA concluded that it was appropriate to
include the specific material in the item designation in order to provide vital information to
procuring agencies as they seek to fulfill their obligations to purchase designated items
composed of the highest percentage of recovered materials practicable. This information
enables the agencies to focus their efforts on products that are currently available for
purchase, reducing their administrative burden. EPA also included information in the
proposed CPG, as well as in the draft RMAN that accompanied the proposed CPG, that
advised procuring agencies that EPA is not recommending the purchase of an item made
from one. particular material over a similar item made from another material. For example,
EPA included the following statement in the preamble discussion for plastic desktop
accessories (59 FR 18879): “This designation does not preclude a procuring agency from
purchasing de&top accessories manufactured from another material, such as wood. It simply
requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing plastic desktop accessories, purchase these
accessories made with recovered materials..."
b. No commenters opposed the designations of the following items: structural
fiberboard, laminated paperboard, patio blocks, traffic barricades, traffic cones, playground
surfaces, running hacks, hydraulic mulch, plastic desktop accessories, and plastic trash bags.
Therefore, today, EPA is promulgating these item designations as proposed. The following
45
subsections discuss the significant comments pertaining to the remaining proposed item
designations.
c. Several commenters requested that EPA designate additional items in the final
CPG. Suggested items included carpet underlay, lead acid batteries, rebuilt and
remanufactured automotive parts, roofing materials, and grocery bags.
Because the designation of items under RCRA section 6002 imposes legally
enforceable duties on procuring agencies, EPA’s designation of items must occur through
formal notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures, EPA cannot designate items without
having provided the opportunity for public comment. EPA will consider the feasibility of
designating the suggested items in a future proposed revision to the CPG.
XI. VEHICULAR PRODUCTS
A. Re-refined Lubricating Gil and Retread Tires
In the proposed CPG, the Agency stated it would include the previous designations
for re-refined lubricating oil and retread tires in a new 40 CFR 247.11(a) and (b),
respectively, as part of consolidating the guidelines (see 59 FR 18867, April 20, 1994). The
new 40 CFR 247.11 includes the existing designations of these two items and a new
designation for engine coolants which is discussed in the following subsection.
B. Engine Coolants
1. Background
In the proposed CPG, the Agency proposed todesignate reclaimed engine coolants
(see 59 FR 18867, April 20, 1994), also known as antifreeze. Automotive engine coolants
are marketed in this country in two formulations: ethylene glycol-based or propylene glycolbased coolants. Propylene glycol-based engine coolants have just recently been marketed
nationwide for consumer purchase. There are additional formulations used in other
countries.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Applicability of designation to non-vehicular engines. Two commenters asked that
EPA clarify that the proposed designation applies only to engine coolants used in vehicles
and not to other glycol-based coolants used in other types of machinery such as generator
motors.
EPA believed that inclusion of engine coolants in the Vehicular Products Category
clarifies that the designation is limited to vehicular engine coolants and does not apply to
46
other non-vehicular coolants. However, to remove any ambiguity, EPA is revising the
engine coolant designation to specify that it applies to vehicles only.
b. Scope of designation. Two commenters urged EPA to limit the designation to
ethylene-glycol based engine coolants and exclude other types of engine coolants. These two
commenters stated that propylene glycol is not currently being reclaimed and that, therefore,
propylene glycol-based engine coolants do not meet the statutory requirements for
designation. Furthermore, one commenter noted that U.S. automobile manufacturers
‘currently disallow the use of propylene glycol engine coolants in their products. Products
which are. not ethylene glycol-based fail to meet the appropriate chemical properties
requirement and are therefore not qualified for use in American Automobile Manufacturers
Association members’ vehicles.’
EPA believes that propylene glycol-based engine coolants are not currently being
recovered and processed into reclaimed engine coolants. However, EPA is unaware of any
technical reason that would prevent this from occurring. RCRA directs EPA to “designate
those items which are or can be produced with recovered materials and whose procurement
by procuring agencies will carry out the objectives of this section [Section 6002 of RCRA].”
Rather than precluding procuring agencies from purchasing propylene glycol-based engine
coolants and reclaiming them, EPA concludes that it is inappropriate to limit the item
designation to ethylene glycol-based engine coolants only. If propylene glycol-based engine
coolants do not meet a procuring agency’s performance requirements, the agency need not
purchase them. Thus, EPA has decided to finalize the engine coolants designation as
Proposed.
c. Hazardous waste. determination. Many comments stated that EPA should not
determine that spent engine coolants are hazardous wastes. Commenters also stated that their
spent engine coolants do not exhibit the toxicity characteristic of a hazardous waste.
The preamble to the proposed CPG included a statement that spent engine coolants in
some instances exhibit the toxicity characteristic of a hazardous waste. This was simply a
statement of fact and was not meant to imply that EPA believed that all spent engine coolants
exhibited the toxicity characteristic of a hazardous waste or that EPA was considering listing
spent engine coolants as a hazardous waste. EPA included these statements only for the
purpose of advising procuring agents that engine coolants can sometimes exhibit a
characteristic of a hazardous waste and, if disposed, must be disposed in accordance with
applicable state and Federal hazardous waste regulations.
d. Scope of ASTM test methods. Commenters pointed out that EPA stated incorrectly
in the preamble to the proposed CPG (see 59 18867, April 20, 1994) that American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) tests D 3306 and D 4985 ate applicable to reclaimed
engine coolant. Commenters explained that these tests actually apply to new or virgin engine
coolant.
47
The commenters are correct. The ASTM Committee on Engine Coolants is in the
process of investigating the effects of various contaminants on engine coolants and intends to
establish specifications for reclaimed and reformulated coolants in the future.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes, that engine coolant satisfies the statutory criteria for selecting items for
designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, significant
quantities of spent engine coolants require disposal annually. Reclamation could substantially
reduce these quantities.
b. Technically proven uses. Reclamation of engine coolants is being done through
on-site and off-site reclamation. Some Navy and Postal Service facilities are reclaiming
engine coolants and have not encountered performance problems with the reclaimed product.
Additionally, EPA received no comments indicating performance problems with reclaimed
engine coolants. The ASTM D15 Committee on Engine Coolants has published standards for
engine coolants and is working. on a standard for reclaimed and reformulated engine coolants.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies operate a large number
of vehicles. The Federal government alone, including the U.S. Postal Service, operates a
fleet of more than 500,000 vehicles of all types: passenger vehicles, light and heavy trucks,
buses, ambulances, off-road vehicles, etc.
Military installations, the Postal Service, and some Federal civilian agencies have
motor pools or vehicle maintenance facilities at which vehicles are serviced. If all of these
agencies were to establish an engine coolant reclamation program, the potential recovery of
used engine coolant would. be significant. While not all agencies have motor pools or vehicle
maintenance centers where engine coolant recycling could be established, EPA believes that
it is important to begin to establish engine coolant reclamation programs throughout the
Federal fleet in order to recover this material. EPA further believes that state and local
government fleets and private sector fleets may follow the Federal lead, thus substantially
increasing engine coolant reclamation and greatly reducing the amount of engine coolants
requiring disposal each year. Additionally, in those instances where reclamation is not
possible, if agencies were to purchase. reclaimed engine coolants directly, this could
significantly contribute to increasing overall engine coolant reclamation.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.1 l(c), EPA is designating reclaimed engine coolant as an item that is
or can be made with recovered materials.
48
XII. CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS
In the CPG, the Agency proposed that new 40 CFR 247.12 contain designations of
the following construction products: building insulation, structuralfiberboard and laminated
paperboard, plastic pipe and fittings, geotextiles, cement and concrete, carpet, and floor tiles
and patio blocks. The following subsections discuss each of these items, the Agency’s
response to public comments, and the final designations of these items, where appropriate,
EPA previously designated building insulation products and cement and concrete containing
fly ash in 1989 and 1983 procurement guidelines, respectively, but proposed to consolidate
these designations in the CPG (see 59 FR 18868, April 20, 1994). These designations are
now included in 40 CFR 247.12(a) and (c), respectively.
A. Building Insulation Products
1. Background
Fiberglass insulation was designated in the 1989 procurement guideline for building
insulation products, The Agency did not recommend recovered materials content levels for
fiberglass because this item was not being made routinely with recovered material at that
time (see 54 FR 7348, February 17, 1989) and it was not clear what contents levels were
feasible. In the CPG, fiberglass is included in the building insulation products designation
(see 59 FR 18890, April 20, 1994). In the draft RMAN, EPA recommended a recovered
materials content range for fiberglass insulation of 20 to 25 percent. EPA requested.
comment on also recommending a post-consumer cullet content of five percent; Comments
on the recommendation are addressed in a separate document entitled, "RMAN for Items
Designated in the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline - Supporting Analyses."
2. Summary of Comments and Agency Response
EPA received two comments opposing the designation of fiberglass. As EPA stated
in the proposed CPG (see 59 FR 18868, April 20, 1994), fiberglass insulation was designated
in the 1989 procurement guideline for building insulation products and the Agency was not
seeking comment on the appropriateness of the prior designation. Rather, EPA requested
comment only on the recommended recovered materials content levels for fiberglass
insulation contained in the draft RMAN.
a. Competing uses of glass cullet. One commenter stated that encouraging the use of
cullet to make fiberglass will interfere with glass bottlers’ efforts to use glass cullet to make
bottles.
EPA does not agree that the use of recovered cullet by fiberglass insulation
manufacturers will interfere with glass bottle manufacturers ability to obtain cullet. In fact,
the opposite may be true. It is easier for glass bottlers to obtain and use recovered cullet
than for fiberglass insulation manufacturers to do so. Glass bottlers, as a whole, are able to
49
use all three colors of bottle cullet, while fiberglass insulation manufacturers are more
restricted regarding the percentage of each color that can be used. In the absence of
empirical data to the contrary, EPA does not believe that there will be. a supply problem for
glass bottlers.
b. Impact on waste minimization programs. A second commenter stated that the
introduction of postconsumer glass cullet into his fiberglass insulation manufacturing process
would increase the quantity of hazardous waste generated at his facility, adversely affecting
his waste minimization program. This commenter stated that postconsumer cullet introduces
metals (including lead, selenium, and chromium) into the manufacturing process which
would, in turn, cause furnace dust and emissions to be hazardous.
EPA notes that it is not mandating the use of recovered materials in the manufacture
of fiberglass insulation. It is solely the decision of the manufacturer to market his product to
procuring agencies seeking fiberglass insulation containing recovered materials:
Additionally, the recommended content levels included in the RMAN do not specify
postconsumer recovered cullet. Provided the commenter has access to sufficient
preconsumer recovered glass cullet to meet the content standards established by a procuring
agency, it may be possible for the commenter to sell his product to the procuring agency and
not increase his generation of hazardous waste.
The Agency applauds all efforts to minimize hazardous waste generation. EPA’s
research shows that fiberglass insulation manufacturing plants typically generate hazardous
waste whether or not they use recovered materials in their raw material mix. EPA
encourages the fiberglass insulation industry to work with the glass packaging industry to
seek ways to reduce the toxic constituents added to glass packaging to eliminate or reduce the
likelihood that additional hazardous waste will be generated due to cullet usage in making
fiberglass products.
B. Structural Fiberboard and Laminated Paperboard
1. Background
In the proposed CPG, EPA proposed designating structural fiberboard and laminated
paperboard (59 FR 18868) for both insulating and structural purposes, including building
board, insulating formboard, sheathing, shingle backer, sound-deadening board; roof
insulating board, acoustical and non-acoustical ceiling tile, insulating wallboard, acoustical
and non-acoustical lay-in panels, floor underlayments, and roof overlay (coverboard).
3
3
Structural fiberboard was defined as having a density between 10 lbs/ft and 31 lbs/ft , as
defined by ASTM specification C 208. Laminated paperboard products were defined as
3
having a density in the range of 42 lbs/ft .
50
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response.
a. Structural fiberboard data. While no commenters opposed the designation of
structural fiberboard, two commenters stated that the information and data the Agency used
in developing the proposed CPG and draft RMAN were inaccurate. The commenters
maintained that EPA’s information on recovered materials usage, particularly its
postconsumer recovered paper data, were not representative of current industry capabilities.
Based on these comments, the Agency conducted additional research to obtain more
current industry data. EPA determined that, although the data used to develop the proposed
CPG. and draft RMAN accurately reflected industry use of recovered materials for the year in
which they were gathered, 1991, they did not reflect current industry usage of recovered
materials, especially postconsumer recovered paper. On the basis of this additional research,
EPA has revised the recovered materials content recommendations for structural fiberboard
contained in the RMAN that accompanies this CPG.
b. Laminated paperboard. EPA did not receive any comments on its proposed
designation of laminated paperboard. Therefore, the Agency is designating laminated
paperboard as proposed.
c. Other board products. In its proposal, EPA also requested additional information
about the use of recovered materials to produce other board products, including
particleboard, hardboard, and medium density fiberboard. The Agency received two
comments on these- products and will use this information in evaluating these products for
potential designation in future updates to the CPG.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that structural fiberboard and laminated paperboard products satisfy the
statutory criteria for selecting items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, both paper
and wood ate significant components of the solid waste stream.
b. Technically proven uses. Roth structural fiberboard and laminated paperboard can
be produced with high levels of recovered materials without compromising product
performance. All seven manufacturers of structural fiberboard and all of the laminated
paperboard manufacturers use recovered materials in the manufacture of their products.
In addition, both structural fiberboard and laminated paperboard containing recovered
materials are established products with established specifications. ASTM specification C 208
applies to structural fiberboard products containing recovered materials. Roth structural
fiberboard and laminated paperboard meet other applicable performance requirements, such
as those established by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), American Society
51
of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), Federal Housing
Administration, and the various building code organizations.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase structural
fiberboard and laminated paperboard products for residential, institutional, and commercial
applications. In 1990, $5.3 million worth of these products were purchased with
appropriated Federal funds. Many Federal agencies disburse funds to state and local
agencies for use in building construction, renovation and repair -- activities for which use of
structural fiberboard and laminated paperboard are appropriate. Therefore, EPA expects
both direct and indirect procurement of these items to increase as a result of this designation.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.12(b), EPA is designating structural fiberboard and laminated
paperboard products. Examples of these products include building board, insulating
formboard, sheathing, shingle backer, sound-deadening board, roof insulating board,
acoustical and non-acoustical ceiling tile, insulating wallboard, acoustical and non-acoustical
lay-in panels, floor underlayments, and roof overlay (coverboard), The designation includes
both insulating and structural uses of structural fiberboard and laminated paperboard
products.
C. Plastic Pipe and Fittings
1. Background
Plastic pipe applications predominantly fall into two categories: pressure and nonpressure uses. Pressure-rated applications include the oil, gas and mining industries, and
pipe used for the transport of potable water. Pressure-rated pipe must be able to handle
significant internal pressure, necessitating greater structural strength than non-pressure
applications.
In the proposed CPG, EPA did not include pressure-rated pipe and pipe rated forcarrying potable water. Several industry experts expressed concern about potential
contamination of potable water from pipe made from non-virgin plastic materials. Also,
because the quality and performance of recovered resins in plastic pipe are only now being
evaluated, manufacturers generally have been unwilling to risk the use of recovered resins in
pressure-rated pipe. Industry experts and users of pressure-rated pipe were concerned about
pipe failure, which could result in physical and chemical hazards and expensive repairs.
In the proposed CPG, EPA proposed to designate plastic pipe and fittings made from
thermoplastic resins, including PVC and HDPE, for the following applications: sewer,
drainage, conduit, and drain, waste and vent (DWV). This proposed designation was based
on the rationale that, compared to pressure applications, these non-pressure applications
generally have lower internal stresses and would not impede the use of recovered materials in
52
plastic pipe and fittings. EPA identified 10 manufacturers of plastic, pipe that use recovered
materials.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Performance. While one commenter supported the proposed designation of plastic
pipe and fittings, EPA received numerous comments expressing concern about the possible
liability and adverse effects were there to be failures of plastic pipe containing recovered
materials. These commenters stated, that the ASTM and American Association of State
Highway and Transportation, Officials (AASHTO) are currently reviewing their material
specifications that preclude the use of recovered materials in plastic pipe and fittings for
possible revision to allow the use. of these materials. These commenters suggested that
ASTM and other reliable specifications are necessary to ensure the quality of plastic pipe
containing recovered materials, and that EPA should not designate plastic pipe containing
recovered materials until such specifications are in place.
As described in the proposed CPG, several manufacturers have conducted
performance testing on pipe made with recovered materials and demonstrated that the pipe
meets applicable ASTM performance specifications.’ However, there currently exist ASTM
and other material specifications that preclude the use of recovered materials in plastic pipe
and fittings. As pointed out by commenters, there is a major effort underway to review
these specifications for possible revision to allow the use of recovered materials. This effort
is not yet completed. Based on the comments received, EPA has become aware that many
manufacturers and users of plastic pipe do not believe that adequate. testing, especially field
testing, has been conducted and that designation should be delayed until such testing is
conducted. For this reason, EPA has determined that it is premature to designate plastic pipe
and fittings, even for non-pressure applications.
b. Product testing. Many commenters in industry and government, particularly state
transportation officials, expressed a strong interest in working with EPA to overcome the
barriers to using plastic pipe made of recovered materials. At least one state transportation
officecurrently is conducting field testing of HDPE drain pipe made of recovered materials.
EPA will continue to follow developments in this area and will reconsider designating plastic
pipe when these barriers have been overcome. In the meantime, EPA encourages
manufacturers and users of plastic pipe made with recovered materials to keep the Agency
apprised of new developments in product performance testing and revision of material
specifications.
3. Designation
EPA is not issuing a final designation for plastic pipe and fittings, because of the
commenters’ concerns described above. EPA is postponing issuance of the final designation
until the issues of performance testing and materials and performance specifications have
been addressed.
53
D. Geotextiles
1. Background
Geotextiles are permeable civil engineering fabrics used in a variety of construction
applications. The four main functions of a geotextile are separation, drainage, filtration, and
slope reinforcement. Depending on the application, a geotextile may serve one or more of
these functions. The five main applications for geotextiles are: road building, drainage,
erosion control, soil stabilization, and waste containment (e.g., landfill construction).
Geotextiles may be made of woven or nonwoven fabrics. Woven geotextiles
generally are stronger than nonwoven fabrics of the same weight, and dominate the drainage,
asphalt overlay, and lining systems markets. Nonwoven geotextiles generally are permeable
to moisture, resistant to rot and mildew, and conform to the subgrade soils. Nonwoven
fabrics dominate the stabilization and separation, and subgrade and base reinforcement
markets.
In the CPG, EPA proposed to designate geotextiles for use in road building, drainage,
erosion control, and soil stabilization, and for use in the gas collection layer and the
protection layer between the drainage stone and the geomembrane liner in waste containment
systems (see 59 FR, 18871, April 20, 1994).
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
Although many commenters supported the proposed designation of geotextiles, the
majority of commenters opposed it.
a. Polyethylene terephthalate geotextiles. Those in support of the designation stated
that there are non-woven geotextiles available made with postconsumer recovered
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and they are being used in a variety of applications. These
commenters also stated that adequate performance testing has been conducted to justify the
designation of geotextiles made with recovered materials.
b. Performance and polypropylene geotextiles. Commenters opposed to the proposed
designation of geotextiles expressed concern that using recovered resins in geotextiles could
result in catastrophic features if used in critical applications, such as in landfills or in road
construction. These commenters stated that evidence does not exist on the long-term
performance of geotextiles made with recovered resin or on the chemical compatibility of
geotextiles containing recovered materials when used in landfill applications. Additional
commenters claimed that no manufacturers actually make geotextiles with postconsumer
polypropylene, that the technology does not exist to make geotextiles with recovered
polypropylene, and that high-quality postconsumer polypropylene is not available in sufficient
quantities for use in making geotextiles.
54
EPA has not yet been able to resolve the numerous technical issues raised during the
comment period. To do so would have meant a delay in issuance of the final CPG and a
delay in the date on which procuring agencies would be required to begin purchasing the 19
additional items that are being designated at this time. Thus, EPA determined that it would
be best to issue the CPG for those items on which the Agency is ready to proceed and to
defer a final decision on the designation of geotextiles until a future update of the CPG.
EPA will continue to track developments in this area, evaluate the issues raised by
commenters, and maintain a dialog with manufacturers and users of geotextiles. EPA
encourages manufacturers of geotextiles made with recovered materials to keep the Agency
apprised of new products being manufactured with recovered materials, the availability of
recovered polypropylene, and developments in product performance testing.
3. Designation
As explained above, EPA is not designating geotextiles at this time.
E. Cement and Concrete
1. Background
In the CPG, EPA proposed to expand the designation of cement and concrete to
include cement and concrete containing ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBF slag)
(see 59 FR 18872-73, April 20, 1994). Blast furnace slag is a by-product from the
production of iron and steel. Granulated blast furnace slag can be ground and blended with
Portland cement for use in concrete. GGBF slag can replace up to 70 percent of the Portland
cement in some concrete mixtures, but more typically, GGBF slag-Portland cement concrete
mixtures contain 25 percent GGBF slag by weight.
EPA originally considered designating this item in the 1983 cement and concrete
procurement guideline but had determined that GGBF slag was not sufficiently available at
that time on a national scale. In the 1994 proposal, EPA noted that GGBF slag was now
more widely available.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
EPA received comments from the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA), the
U.S. Bureau of Mines, one steel manufacturer, three industry associations, eight states
individually, and sixteen states and the Province of Ontario through the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
a. Characterization of blast furnace slag. The Bureau of Mines provided detailed
comments on EPA’s characterization of slag production and the capacity available to grind
slag.
55
EPA incorporated the characterization information provided by the Bureau of Mines
into section II.A of this document. Capacity to grind slag is addressed below in subsection
E.2.b.
b. Comments opposing designation of GGBF slag. FHWA and the states opposed the
designation of GGBF slag for one or more of the following reasons. (1) GGBF slag and/or
cements blended with GGBF slag are not available. (2) There are concerns about the
performance of GGBF slag, and all technical concerns should be answered prior to EPA’s
designation of an item. (3) Use of GGBF slag would compete with or replace coal fly ash.
(4) Designation will create a tremendous administrative burden on FHWA and state agencies
and may not create additional markets for, nor significantly increase, the usage of GGBF
slag.
(1) Availability. Several state agencies questioned the availability of GGBF slag. In
addition, the Bureau of Mines commented that there are only two companies with three
plants that process GGBF slag for use in cement. FHWA commented that blast furnace slag
granulators are located in four Eastern states: Indiana, Maryland, Ohio, and West Virginia.
FHWA further noted that most states that currently use GGBF slag cements are located
proximate to these four states. Other commenters questioned the availability of GGBF slag
in states west of the Mississippi River, particularly in the Great Plains and Rocky Mountain
states. They also questioned whether GGBF slag or granulated blast furnace slag will be
available at competitive prices if shipped long distances.
Data provided by GGBF slag producers indicate that granulators currently are located
at four steel plants. These granulators are capable of producing approximately 1.95 million
tons of granulated slag. In 1994, approximately 60 percent of this capacity was used for the
production of ground granulated blast furnace slag. Thus, there is excess capacity that could
be used to supply granulated blast furnace slag for grinding into a component of cement or
concrete.
EPA’s Report to Congress on special wastes from mineral processing* indicates that
in the future, most primary iron producers in the U.S. are expected to modernize their blast
furnaces and install slag granulation facilities, resulting in greater availability of granulated
blast furnace slag that could be used in cement and concrete. The GGBF producers
commented that an additional five steel companies are considering the installation of
granulation capacity at locations in six states. These commenters also indicated that ten
cement manufacturers in nine states currently grind granulated blast furnace slag. Three
more companies located in three additional states might begin grinding granulated blast
furnace slag in 1995.
1
“Report to Congress on Special Wastes from Mineral Processing,” Volume II:
Methods and Analyses, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, July
1990, Chapter 8.
56
After reviewing the information submitted by’ all commenters, EPA concludes that
GGBF slag currently is used primarily in Eastern states and states located just west of the
Mississippi River. The product also has been used in states more remote from the nation’s
steel centers (e.g., Texas, Oklahoma, and Colorado), however. According to FHWA’s data
base of state specifications, both Georgia and North Dakota permit the use of GGBF slag.
Since states generally do not specify a material unless it is available, the fact that these two
states permit the use of GGBF slag indicates that this item can be made available to states
more remote from steel mills.
As discussed in section VII.B.5 of this document, section 6002 of RCRA recognizes
that procuring agencies may not always be able to purchase a designated item. Section 6002
provides four exceptions to the requirement that procuring agencies must purchase items
designated by EPA. Two of these exceptions are when (1) the item is not reasonably
available within a reasonable period of time, and (2) the item is available only at an
unreasonable price. Thus, under RCRA, if GGBF slag is not available, a procuring agency
is not required to purchase it. The procuring agency must take the affirmative step of
inquiring whether the item will be made available, however.
EPA has concluded that availability is no longer a barrier to designating GGBF slag.
The item clearly is more widely available than in 1983, when EPA last considered
designating it. Commenters indicated that it can be made available in additional states. In
light of the Agency’s’ past experience with the positive effect of an item designation on
markets, EPA concludes that designation. of cement and concrete containing GGBF slag will
encourage additional states to consider the use of GGBF slag, thereby creating expanded
markets for this item.
(2) Performance. The comments contained both positive and negative information
about the performance of GGBF slag. Several states commented that they use GGBF slag
for its positive attributes. According to FHWA, GGBF slag reacts with some of the byproducts of the cement hydration reaction to form additional cementitious products. Both
FHWA and several state agencies commented that GGBF slag is known to contribute to a
reduction in alkali-silica reactivity. FHWA also commented ‘that GGBF slag can reduce the
permeability of the concrete and increase the concrete’s resistance to sulfate attack, because
the concrete will contain less tricalcium aluminate, the component of Portland cement which
is susceptible to sulfate attack.
Commenters cited eight negative performance factors about the use of GGBF slag,
although conflicting information was provided about almost all of these factors. Based on the
information submitted by commenters, EPA concludes that there are instances when it is not
appropriate to use GGBF slag. However, in light of the fact that there are instances where
the use of GGBF slag can be beneficial, EPA believes that a designation of this item will
encourage procuring agencies to learn more about this product and increase the likelihood
that they will begin to purchase it where it is available.
57
First, commenters stated that water demand could be increased if GGBF slag is used.
The State of Indiana noted that it does not allow GGBF slag from a particular source whose
product has a high water absorption. The slag granulators stated that this is incorrect and
cited several studies and concrete industry practice manuals which conclude that there are
water savings from using GGBF slag. FHWA’s final comments to EPA state “GGBF slag
will generally improve the workability and reduce the water demand of a concrete,” but that
“some slags will have the opposite effect; that is, concrete made with them will require more
water than if made without. This is due to differences in production processes between
sources of GGBF slag. The possibility of an increased water demand is not insurmountable,
but it is important to remember that this situation can occur and is dependent on the source
of the GGBF slag.”
Second, several commenters stated that concrete containing GGBF slag is more
difficult to finish (i.e., workability is decreased). The slag granulators cited several studies
and concrete industry practice manuals to the contrary. As noted in the previous paragraph,
FHWA’s final comments to EPA state that GGBF slag will generally improve the workability
of concrete, but that there have been instances where the opposite is true.
Third, commenters stated that concrete containing GGBF slag sets at a slower rate
than other concretes. This can be a concern for some construction projects where it is
necessary to accelerate the construction process (e.g., to return a roadway to service after
repairs); Two states also commented that GGBF slag cements are not suitable for use in cold
months due to the slow set time. EPA notes that 70 percent of concrete is poured in warmer
months, however.
Fourth, in a related concern; commenters stated that concrete containing GGBF slag
gains strength at a slower rate than other concretes. As with set time, rate of strength gain
can be a concern for some construction projects where it is necessary to accelerate the
construction process (e.g., to return a roadway to service after repairs). Information
provided by the slag granulators indicates that the rate and level of strength gain for GGBF
slag-based concretes is addressed by the concrete mix design.
Fifth, several states questioned the freer&and-thaw durability of concrete containing
GGBF slag. One of these states admitted that it had not tried the product, however. The
State of Indiana commented that a laboratory evaluation of GGBF slag concrete questioned
its freeze-and-thaw durability. The GGBF slag producers commented that there were
problems with this laboratory evaluation, but according to FHWA, when Indiana recently
performed a second laboratory evaluation, the results also indicated a lower level of freezeand-thaw durability. By contrast, the GGBF, slag producers commented that the State of
‘Illinois had recently completed freeze-and-thaw testing and achieved suitable results: They
further noted that both Pennsylvania and Virginia were satisfied with the freeze-and-thaw
durability of concrete containing GGBF slag. EPA also notes that the States of
Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and New Hampshire commented that they use GGBF slag
concretes, and none indicated that they had experienced’ freeze-and-thaw problems with the
58
product.
Sixth, the State of New York reported scaling when deicing chemicals are used. New
York reported problems with a bridge made with concrete containing 50 percent GGBF slag
and a sidewalk containing concrete mixes of 25-50 percent GGBF slag. Neither the GGBF
slag producers nor FHWA addressed this concern in their comments. However, the
Province of Ontario submitted a study that showed that the scaling resistance of concrete
surfaces exposed to freezing and thawing in the presence of deicing salt was influenced by
(1) the type and quantity of cementing material in the concrete mix, (2) the curing regime
used, and (3) the use of high alkali Portland cement. According to the Ontario study, the use
of 25 percent or less GGBF slag would result in reduced alkali-silica reactions without
increased salt scaling. The study also recommends a specific curing regime that prevents or
reduces the scaling problem.
Seventh, the State of North Carolina commented that GGBF slag is suspected with
other factors to have contributed to significant problems in a bridge deck. North Carolina
also commented that it permits use of GGBF slag in its specifications, however, although it
provided no other information about the performance of the product in other applications.
From additional comments submitted by the GGBF Slag producers and FHWA, it, is clear
that other states which use GGBF slag cements in bridge decks have not experienced
problems; that no commenter could state conclusively that GGBF slag was a factor in the
bridge deck problem; and that, even if GGBF slag was a factor, a combination of several
factors contributed to the problems with the bridge deck, potentially including the use of a
high level of retarder in the concrete mix.
Finally, the State of Idaho commented that it used slag in the past but does not
currently do so because the slag may contain low levels of radiation.’ Potential users of
GGBF slag should note that the slag used in Idaho was from elemental phosphorous
production, not blast furnace slag. GGBF slag does not contain radioactive components.
After reviewing the performance comments, EPA agrees with FHWA that GGBF slag
is suitable for some, but not all, concrete applications and, therefore, it should not be blindly
substituted for Portland cement without regard for its effects on the characteristics of the
concrete mix. EPA’ further agrees that education is necessary but notes that FHWA recently
awarded a contract for the development of guides for the use of various recovered materials
in highway construction applications. Blast furnace slag is one of the materials to be
addressed. These guides should increase the information available to agencies
cement and concrete containing GGBF slag.
Because the use of GGBF slag in cement and concrete can be beneficial both to users
of concrete and in reducing the quantities of this material requiring disposal, EPA concludes
that cement and concrete containing GGBF slag should be designated under RCRA section
6002. Under the exceptions in RCRA section 6002, in those instances where the use of
GGBF slag will not meet a procuring agency’s reasonable performance requirements, the
59
agency is not required to purchase the product.
(3) Competition with coal fly ash. Several state agencies commented that coal fly ash
is generated and used in their state. They stated that a designation of GGBF slag could result
in reduced markets for coal fly ash because GGBF slag would compete with coal fly ash.
EPA’s designation of GGBF slag does not require procuring agencies to favor this
item over coal fly ash. Because it is an expansion of the existing cement and concrete
designation, the GGBF slag designation simply requires that procuring agencies consider
cement and concrete containing either recovered material (i.e., coal fly ash or GGBF slag).
Which type of cement or concrete a procuring agency purchases will depend on a number of
factors, including the performance requirements for the construction project, product
availability, competition, and product price.
(4) Administrative burden FHWA and several states argued that cement and concrete
containing GGBF slag should not be designated because the designation could create a
tremendous administrative burden and might not create additional markets for nor
significantly increase the usage of GGBF slag.
EPA disagrees that the designation might not create additional markets. EPA believes
that there will be additional opportunities to use GGBF slag as more of it is made available
and procuring agencies not currently using the item consider its use. We are also aware that
procuring agencies incur costs as a result of item designation, and as explained elsewhere in
this document, we have expended a great deal of effort to estimate these costs. Our
estimates, based in part on FHWA’s own estimates, are discussed in Section XIX of this
document. While these costs are not inconsequential, they are necessary to ensure that
appropriate procuring agency personnel understand the requirements of Section 6002 of
RCRA and, among other things, revise specifications to favor the purchase of designated
items containing recovered materials when they meet the agencies’ price and performance
objectives. FHWA, as a specification-writing agency, bears a larger share of these costs for.
cement and concrete products containing GGBF than do other agencies. As explained above,
there is sufficient interest in the beneficial use of GGBF slag in cement and concrete that
FHWA is developing guidance on its use. As this information becomes available, EPA
believes that many more procuring agencies will begin using or increasing their current usage
of GGBF slag in cement and concrete products to take advantage of its beneficial properties.
Thus, we believe the designation and the attendant costs are justified.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that cement and concrete containing GGBF slag satisfy the statutory
criteria for selecting items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, approximately
90 percent of iron blast furnace slag is air-cooled, with granulated and expanded slag making
60
up the remaining 10 percent. Approximately 75 percent of the blast furnace slag generated
annually is used in aggregate applications, a smaller percentage is used in concrete, and the
remainder is disposed or stockpiled.
b. Technically proven uses. It is technologically and economically feasible to process
granulated blast furnace slag into an additive for cement and concrete. The granulated slag
is ground into a consistency somewhat finer than Portland cement. GGBF slag replaces a
portion of the Portland cement in concrete mixtures. In some concrete mixtures, GGBF slag
can replace up to 75 percent of the Portland cement, on a pound for pound basis. Most
concrete mixtures containing GGBF slag use between 25 and 50 percent slag, however.
FHWA commented that there are three basic types of blended cement containing
GGBF slag: Type IS, which contains 25-50 percent GGBF slag; Type ISM, which contains
less than 25 percent GGBF slag; and Type S, which contains over 70 percent GGBF slag.
FHWA stated that Type IS is the most commonly used blended cement,, while Type S is,
rarely used due to its slow setting rate.
Like coal fly ash, GGBF slag can improve the performance of concrete, although
there is some inconsistent data about the performance of GGBF slag-Portland cement
concretes, as discussed above. According to information provided by the GGBF slag
producers and some state agency commenters, GGBF slag can result in higher strength;
lower heat; lower permeability; better durability in marine, salt, and chemical environments;
and lighter color. FHWA, several state agencies, and the Province of Ontario commented
that GGBF slag can help to reduce alkali-silica reactions. FHWA also stated that GGBF slag
can help provide an increased resistance to sulfate attack.
In the proposed CPG, EPA noted that the GGBF slag producers had informed EPA
that GGBF slag can be used compatibly with coal fly ash and other cementitious and
pozzolanic-materials when used in concrete. The American Portland Cement Alliance
commented that it supported the proposed designation, indicating that use of GGBF slag is
accepted by the cement and concrete industry.
In the proposed CPG, EPA stated that there is approximately 1.2 million tons of
domestic cement industry grinding capacity specifically devoted to the manufacture of GGBF
slag. EPA also stated that five Portland cement companies operate six grinding plants to
produce GGBF slag; that two Portland cement companies may begin producing GGBF slag at
three locations, and that a third company recently bought a GGBF slag plant.
Corrected information provided by commenters indicates that there is 1.95 million
tons of blast furnace slag granulation capacity at four locations. Ten cement companies in
nine states currently grind granulated blast furnace slag into GGBF slag. According to the
slag granulators, three more companies, in three additional states, will begin grinding
commercial quantities of GGBF slag in 1995.
61
/
Consensus and state and Federal specifications are evidence of the performance of
GGBF slag in cement and concrete. ASTM and AASHTO each have two specifications
applicable to use of GGBF slag: ASTM C 989, Ground Granulated Blast-Furnace Slag for
Use in Concrete Mortars; ASTM C 595, Blended Hydraulic Cements; AASHTO M 302
Ground Granulated last Furnace Slag for Use in Concrete and Mortars; and AASHTO M
240, Blended Hydraulic Cements. In addition, there is an American Concrete Institute
Standard Practice, ACI 226.R1, Ground Granulated Blast-Furnace Slag as a Cementitious
Constituent in Concrete.
FHWA commented that the Federal Lands Highway Division allows the use of both
Type IS and Type ISM blended cements. The States of Alabama, Connecticut, District of
Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, North
Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia also have adopted
specifications which allow the use of GGBF slag in one or, more applications.
c. Impact of government procurement. In the 1983 cement and concrete procurement
guideline, EPA noted that almost one-half of total U.S. cement consumption is in public
construction projects, many of which are funded with Federal funds, Factoring in usage of
cement and concrete containing coal fly ash and uses’ for which recover& materials may be
inappropriate, the potential impact of designating GGBF slag still could be substantial.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.12(c), EPA is adding GGBF slag to the existing designation of cement
and concrete containing coal fly ash. As discussed above, this designation does not require
procuring agencies to favor GGBF slag over coal fly ash. Rather, the addition of the GGBF
slag designation simply requires that procuring agencies consider cement and concrete
containing either recovered material (i.e., coal fly ash or GGBF slag). Which type of
cement or concrete a procuring agency purchases will depend on a number of factors,
including the performance requirements for the construction project, product availability,
competition, and product price.
F. Carpet
1. Background
In the CPG, the Agency proposed designating carpet (see 59 FR 18873, April 20,
1994). Broadloom carpet, meaning roll goods in 12-foot widths, for wall-to-wall installation,
generally is comprised of face fibers (usually made of nylon, polyester, wool, or
polypropylene) inserted into a primary backing, which is usually made of polypropylene
materials. The fiber is then locked or glued into place by a layer of latex adhesive; a
secondary backing made of polypropylene or jute fiber then is applied to provide stability.
Carpet squares or tiles are manufactured first as broadloom carpet; however, after inserting
the fiber into the primary backing, a sheet made of polypropylene or other material is added
62
for stability,, and a secondary backing made of PVC, polyurethane, or other hardback
material is applied. Finally, the carpet is cut into squares, usually 18” x 18”.
The majority of carpet manufactured in the U.S. is made of nylon carpet fibers, with
a smaller percentage (about 10 percent) being made of polyester. Commenters provided
information on the market share for various carpet fiber types. The market share for carpet
fiber is approximately as follows: 67 percent nylon, 23 percent polypropylene, 10 percent
polyester, and 1 percent wool.
At this time, EPA is not aware of any carpet fibers other than polyester that are
manufactured with postconsumer recovered materials. Several major nylon fiber.
manufacturers commented that they have initiated programs to recover used carpets from the
waste stream and reprocess the nylon into new products. As these programs mature, there
may be a supply of postconsumer nylon that will be suitable for the manufacture of new
nylon carpet fiber. Some commenters stated that they currently reuse nylon fiber scrap in
their manufacturing process. However, the commenters did not make it clear whether this
scrap would be considered preconsumer material or “rework” material normally reintroduced
in the manufacturing process. Further, even if this nylon fiber scrap would be considered
preconsumer material, it appears that it is a standard industry practice to incorporate this
material into the manufacturing process as a normal business practice to reduce raw material
costs. It does not appear that these materials are truly being diverted from disposal. Thus,
designating nylon carpet at this time would have little impact on diverting waste materials
from disposal. Further, no commenters provided information on the percent of preconsumer
nylon fiber contained in their products.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Performance. Several commenters were concerned about the proposed designation
of polyester carpet, stating that this item generally does not meet the performance standards
for commercial applications, Commenters stated that nylon carpeting is preferred in
commercial applications because of the fiber’s superior performance characteristics, while .
polyester carpeting is mainly suited for low-wear or residential applications. Another
commenter stated that nylon fibers can be made in a loop pile construction, whereas
polyester fibers are typically made in a cut-pile construction which is prone to faster wear.
EPA is aware that polyester carpeting may not perform as well as nylon carpeting in
high-wear and severe-wear applications. For this reason, EPA proposed to. designate
polyester carpet for low- and medium-wear applications only. The designation of polyester
carpet applies only in those cases where procuring agencies have determined that polyester
carpet has suitable performance characteristics to meet the agencies’ particular applications.
Where it is determined that polyester carpet is suitable, procuring agencies should purchase
polyester carpet containing recovered materials.
b. Scope of designation. Several commenters believed that the terms “low and
63
medium-wear applications” were not well defined. These commenters noted that most
government agencies require carpeting for high-traffic or commercial applications, and were
concerned that lack of a clear definition may encourage the use of polyester carpeting in
applications where it may not be appropriate.
It is not EPA’s intent to recommend the use of a product where it is not suitable.
The Carpet and Rug Institute uses the following guideline selecting the quality of carpets
to be used in various areas: “light” for bedrooms, dressing rooms, and some dining rooms
in private homes; “moderate” for living and dining rooms in private homes, motel and hotel
bedrooms and private offices; “heavy” for commercial type installations in office buildings,
public rooms, motel and hotel lobbies, stairways and stores; and “severe” for corridors, and
other wheeled traffic areas. EPA recommends that procuring agencies follow these general
guidelines in determining applications that may be suitable for the use of polyester carpet
containing recovered materials. EPA recommends the use of polyester carpet containing .
recovered materials for “light” and “moderate” applications, consistent with the types of uses
in the above guidelines.
c. Impact of solid waste generation. Some commenters were concerned that, if
government agencies substituted polyester carpeting in applications for which nylon or other
carpeting was more suitable, the polyester carpeting may “wear out” sooner and have to be
replaced more frequently, This would have the unintended effect of increasing solid waste
generation.
It clearly is not EPA’s intent to increase solid waste generation from the use of a
carpet that is not suitable for a given application. Today’s designation of polyester carpet
applies only in those cases where a procuring agency has determined that the use of polyester
carpet is suitable, given the performance requirements and expected wear characteristics of a
given- application. EPA does not intend for a procuring agency to select a polyester carpet
for applications where a nylon, wool, or other carpet is better suited. However, EPA
recommends that procuring agencies evaluate whether polyester carpet is appropriate to meet,
their needs, and, if so, to specify polyester carpet containing recovered materials.
d. Carpet containing recovered nylon. Several nylon fiber manufacturers stated that
they are developing technologies to recover nylon from used carpeting through chemical
recycling (i.e., depolymerization). This postconsumer nylon could be used as a feedstock to
make a wide range of new products, including nylon carpet fiber. The commenters were
concerned that the CPG will discourage the industry’s active chemical recycling efforts,
be-cause the procurement designation currently applies only to polyester carpet.
EPA does not believe that the CPG will in any way discourage the industry’s nylon
recycling efforts, In fact, it has been EPA’s experience with the existing procurement
guidelines that item designations encourage manufacturers of similar items to begin using
recovered materials too. EPA encourages the continued efforts of the nylon fiber
manufacturers to develop and commercialize nylon recovery’ technologies and to manufacture
64
nylon fiber with postconsumer resin content. The designation applies only to polyester
carpet because that is the only type of carpet that currently is available with recovered
materials content. EPA encourages nylon fiber and carpet manufacturers to keep the Agency
apprised of the status of their efforts. If nylon carpet made with postconsumer recovered
materials becomes available, EPA will evaluate it as a potential procurement item in a future
update to the CPG.
e. Designation of carpet underlay. One manufacturer requested that EPA designate a
carpet underlay made of up to 15 percent recovered tire rubber.
EPA will. consider the feasibility of designating carpet underlay in a future revision to
the CPG.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that polyester carpet fiber meets the statutory criteria for selecting items
for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. EPA has identified two manufacturers that make
carpet fiber from postconsumer PET (i.e., polyester), The main source of postconsumer
PET is recovered soft drink bottles, which arc washed, ground, melted, extruded, and then
spun into fiber. As discussed above in section II.A, plastic, including PET, is a significant
portion of the nation’s municipal solid waste.
b. Technically proven uses. One manufacturer of carpet containing recovered PET
offers carpet in one commercial style and 100 to 150 residential styles of carpet; the carpet is
marketed nationally. The other manufacturer of carpet containing recovered PET offerscarpet in 1,800 patterns, and in 70 colors; the carpet also is marketed nationwide. This
manufacturer currently has a contract under GSA’s New Item Introductory Schedule for
polyester carpet containing recovered materials. Roth companies claim that their products
meet applicable performance requirements. Carpet containing recovered materials has been
installed in several Federal and state government buildings. For example, the U.S. Forest
Service has installed a polyester carpet containing recovered materials in a visitor’s center in
Gainsville, Georgia; and the General Services Administration, Federal Supply Service, has
installed such carpet in offices in San Francisco, California. According to the agencies’
contacts, the carpet is performing well thus far; however, no data has been gathered on its
wear performance.
There are numerous specifications that must be considered when purchasing carpet.
ASTM has several test methods for carpet fiber; including abrasion resistance, electrostatic
propensity, flammability, specific optical density of smoke, colorfastness, pilling and fuzzing
resistance, and fiber tuft bind. Other organizations that have standards pertaining to carpet
include the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, and the Carpet and Rug
Institute. During the public comment period, EPA did not receive information on any
65
specifications that explicitly prohibit the use of carpet fiber made of recovered materials.
EPA understands that a few Federal agencies currently have specifications that
preclude the use of polyester carpet for performance reasons. For example, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers has a specification that requires the use of only nylon or wool carpet, and
thereby prohibits the purchase of polyester carpet. ‘According to an agency contact, this
specification was written because the agency believed that only nylon or wool carpet could
meet their performance requirements. The U.S. Navy has a specification that precludes the
use of any carpeting containing synthetic materials (e.g., polyester, nylon or polypropylene)
for use on ships, due to concerns of flammability in the event of a fire. The Agency
recognizes that there may be valid reasons for precluding the use of polyester carpet in some
applications, such as described above for the U.S. Navy; however, EPA encourages
procuring agencies to review their specifications to ensure that the use of polyester carpet
and, thus, carpet containing recovered materials, is not unnecessarily precluded.
c. Impact of government, procurement. The primary use of carpet in government
installations is for commercial, high-wear, applications. The selection of carpet type. is a
decision made by each individual procuring agency. As discussed in the previous section,
there are applications in government installations, including commercial and heavy-wear
applications, where polyester carpet is used. Other possible uses of polyester carpet
containing recovered materials include conference rooms and private offices. Use of
polyester carpet containing recovered materials will create both a market for this item and
demonstrate its performance characteristics.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.12(d), EPA is designating carpet made of polyester fiber for use in
light-wear and moderate-wear applications. The designation does not include polyester carpet
for use in heavy-wear or severe-wear applications; however, procuring agencies are
encouraged to evaluate the suitability of polyester carpet in these applications. The
designation applies where the procuring agency determines that polyester carpet has suitable
performance characteristics for a particular application. This designation does not preclude a
procuring agency from purchasing carpet made of other materials, such as nylon, wool, or
polypropylene. The designation, simply requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing
polyester carpet, purchase this item made with recovered materials.
G. Floor Tiles and Patio Blocks
1. Background
In the CPG, EPA proposed designating floor tiles and patio blocks made with
recovered rubber or plastic (see 59 FR 18874, April 20, 1994). In the proposed rule, EPA
also requested comment on whether there were any specifications that prohibit the use of
recovered materials in the manufacture of floor tiles or patio blocks (see 58 FR 18374, April
66
20, 1994). The Agency received no additional information in this regard and is not aware of
any specifications that preclude the use of recovered materials in the manufacture of floor
tiles or patio blocks.
a. Floor tiles. Floor tiles are used in a variety of applications, including office
spaces, entranceways, bathrooms, laboratories, and hallways. EPA has information on 10
manufacturers and/or distributors of floor tiles containing recovered materials. The
recovered materials used in these products include rubber derived from old tires, and various
plastic’ resins, most commonly PVC (i.e., vinyl).
Five of the 10 companies make or distribute floor tiles that contain postconsumer tire
rubber. Some of these companies add a small amount of virgin rubber, adhesive fabric, or
coloring agents to their products. All five of these companies market their products
nationally for applications such as entrance Ways in airports and stores, furniture showrooms,
skating rinks, and fitness centers.
In addition, five of these companies nationally market floor tiles made from recovered
PVC, including some postconsumer resin. A few types of floor tile are made with
preconsumer PVC from swimming pool liners, roof membranes, and automobile dashboard
cutouts. These tiles are used in various applications, such as fitness centers, bathrooms, and
cafeterias. One type of floor tile is made from 90-100 percent preconsumer recovered PVC
and is used for laboratories, work stations, shopping, malls, schools, restaurants, office
buildings, and other applications. Another type of tile is interlocking and made of
postconsumer PVC from car doors and fender strips. These tiles are generally used for
heavyduty applications such as entrance vestibules, work areas behind cashier counters, and
under heavy equipment, in fitness centers. EPA has no information indicating that floor tiles
containing recovered materials are used in applications such as general office flooring.
b. Patio blocks. Patio blocks are used in the construction of patio areas and
walkways for gardens and trails. EPA has information on six manufacturers of patio blocks
made with recovered materials. The recovered materials used to make these products include
rubber derived from old tires and blends of plastics resins (e.g., HDPE and LDPE), rubber
and plastic, and rubber and wood.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Scope of floor tile designation. The Agency did not receive any comments in
opposition to its designation of floor tiles. However, commenters explained that floor tiles
containing recovered materials are not typically used in certain applications, such as for
standard office flooring. Commenters explained that their use has been limited to certain
heavy-duty applications.
EPA is not aware of any floor tiles containing recovered materials being used in
standard office flooring applications; consistent with information submitted by commenters,
67
their use has been limited to heavy-duty, commercial applications. For this reason, EPA is
limiting the recommendations contained in the Recovered Materials Advisory Notice that
accompanies the final CPG to rubber and plastic floor tiles used in heavy-duty, commercial
applications. If other uses, such as for standard office flooring are identified in the future,
EPA will consider revising its recommendations to incorporate these applications.
b. Designation of patio blocks. The Agency did not receive any comments in
opposition to its proposed designation of patio blocks.
2. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that floor tiles and patio blocks containing recovered rubber or plastic
meet the statutory criteria for selecting items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, both plastic
and tires are sign&ant components of solid waste. While both are being recovered,
additional markets are needed.
b. Technically proven uses.. ‘Floor tiles made of recovered rubber or plastic have
been used in a variety of applications, including work stations, laboratories, fitness centers,
bathrooms, cafeterias, entrance vestibules, and other heavy-duty traffic areas. These uses are
consistent with the way tiles are used by procuring agencies. Patio blocks made of recovered
materials have been used in the construction of garden walkways and trails. EPA is not
aware of any specifications that would preclude the use of recovered materials in floor tiles
or patio blocks.
c. Impact of government procurement. Floor tiles are used by Federal agencies in a
variety of building applications. Patio blocks are used in the design of walkways, such as for
gardens or trails. Federal agencies that may use patio blocks include the U.S. Park Service,
U.S. Forest Service, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
3. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.12(e), EPA is designating floor tiles and patio blocks containing
rubber or plastic. EPA recommends that procuring agencies evaluate whether the available
floor tile products containing recovered materials are suitable for the specified application,
and, if so, that procuring agencies purchase floor tiles containing recovered materials. This
designation does not preclude a procuring agency from purchasing floor tiles or patio blocks
manufactured using other materials. It simply requires that a procuring agency, when
purchasing floor tiles or patio blocks manufactured from rubber or plastic, purchase such
items made with recovered materials.
68
XIII. TRANSPORTATION PRODUCTS
A. Temporary Traffic Control Devices
1. Background
EPA proposed designating two types of temporary traffic control devices in the CPG traffic cones and traffic barricades (see 59 FR 18874, April 20, 1994). Temporary traffic
control devices are used in a variety of situations where it is necessary to redirect, channel,
or restrict traffic in areas of highway construction or repairs. They may also be used to
mark a road hazard that may exist in the way of traffic. For purposes of controlling traffic,
such devices must be stable and clearly visible. Traffic cones must be able to withstand
impact without damage to themselves or to vehicles. In addition, temporary traffic control
devices must be manageable by work crews responsible for transporting, handling, and
storing them. Definitions, applications, and requirements for traffic control devices are
found in the “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices” (MUTCD), which is published
by the Federal Highway Administration.
a. Traffic cones. Traffic cones are conical in shape with a broadened and weighted
base, making them able to withstand significant wind gusts without tipping or blowing away.
In order to be able to withstand an impact without damaging a vehicle, the upper component
of a traffic cone is typically made from LDPE or PVC plastic. The lower component of a
traffic cone is typically made from a rubber or plastic material capable of providing ballast
and friction with the surface of the roadway. Typical applications for traffic cones are
described in section 6C-4 of the MUTCD.
EPA identified several manufacturers and distributors of traffic cones containing
postconsumer LDPE and PVC materials, as well as crumb rubber from scrap tires. In
general, both recovered and postconsumer recovered plastics are used in the upper
component of the cones, and crumb rubber and/or plastics are used in the base.
b. Traffic barricades. There are three types of traffic barricades: Type I, Type II, or
Type III. Type I or Type II barricades are intended for use in situations where traffic is
maintained through an area being constructed and/or reconstructed. Type III barricades are
used when a road section is to be closed-off to traffic. Applications for traffic barriers are
described in section 6C-9 of the MUTCD.
Traffic barricades are typically made from wood, steel, plastic, or a combination of
these materials. The traditional design of the barricades typically involves the use of steel in
the supporting frame and wood in the cross rails. In past years, many manufacturers of
traffic barricades have shifted to the use of recovered materials in both the supporting frame
and rails of the barricades. Manufacturers are able use recovered materials to manufacture
the housing and lenses used in lighting devices affixed to the barricades as well.
69
EPA identified several manufacturers and distributors of Type I and Type II traffic
barricades containing recovered fiberglass and plastics, including HDPE, and blends of
HDPE and PET or LDPE.
EPA acknowledges that the wood panels used in the manufacture of certain traffic
barricades may contain recovered wood and additionally acknowledges that all of the steel
used in the manufacture of traffic barricades contains recovered scrap metal. The Agency is
also aware that some traffic barricades are made with recovered steel and, in the proposed
CPG, requested information on the use of both recovered wood and steel in the manufacture
of traffic barricades (see 59 FR 18875, April 20, 1994). Commenters submitted some
information regarding the use of recovered steel in the manufacture of steel products. This
information is discussed in the supporting analyses for the related RMAN also located in the
RCRA public docket.
c. Other traffic control devices. Other temporary traffic control devices, such as
tubular markers, drums, or vertical panels, can serve the same purposes as traffic cones and
barricades. Tubular markers are defined in section 6C-3, vertical panels in section 6C-5,
and drums in section 6C-7 of the MUTCD.
EPA identified one manufacturer of vertical panels using recovered polypropylene and
crumb rubber and one manufacturer of tubular markers using recovered PVC and crumb
rubber. Because there would be insufficient competition in supplying these two items
containing recovered materials, EPA did not propose to designate these items. In addition,
because EPA was unable to identify any manufacturers of drums using recovered materials,
the Agency also did not propose to designate drums.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response,
a. Designation of traffic cones and traffic barricades. No commenters opposed the
designation of either traffic cones or’ traffic barricades.
b. Other devices. No commenters opposed the decision not to designate other types
of traffic control devices.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that temporary traffic control devices satisfy the statutory criteria for
selecting items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, plastic and
rubber are significant components of the solid waste stream. Roth of these materials are
technically and economically feasible to recover for reuse, and additional markets for them
are needed.
70
Many manufacturers of traffic control devices are currently working to increase the
amounts of postconsumer plastic and rubber used in their products.
b. Technically proven uses. Temporary traffic control devices made with recovered
materials have been produced in the U.S. for several years. Manufacturers have been using
high percentages of crumb rubber buffings in the lower component of traffic cones since the
conception of this device, but have not advertised this fact. The substitution of recovered
materials in the plastic components of traffic control devices is technically and economically
feasible in this application. This is evidenced by the substantial increase in the procurement
of these items by state agencies. A recent multi-state procurement led by the State of New
York involved more than 30,000 traffic cones made with 50 percent total recovered materials
and 6 percent postconsumer materials. A recent procurement by a large city involved more
than 300 traffic barricades made with 100 percent postconsumer recovered content.
Temporary traffic control devices must be stable and clearly visible. Traffic cones
must-be able to withstand impact without damage to themselves or to vehicles. In addition,
temporary traffic control devices must be manageable by work crews transporting, handling,
and storing them. General performance requirements for temporary traffic control devices
involve appearance, size, weight, and durability, manufacturers are currently able to use
recovered materials successfully in the production of these devices and meet applicable
performance specifications.
Section 635 of “Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on.
Federal Highway Projects, FP-85” contains the Federal specifications for temporary traffic
control devices. EPA examined the specifications, and found that section 635.02 does not
preclude the use of recovered materials in temporary traffic control devices. Further, the
Federal specifications reference the requirements contained in the MUTCD, which also do
not preclude the use of recovered materials.
In addition to the Federal specifications, state procuring agencies may have additional
materials or performance requirements for temporary traffic control devices. Several state
procuring agencies have additional requirements and programs to test or confirm material
properties of traffic control devices prior to acceptance of shipment. Most of the currently
available traffic barricades containing recovered materials are able to meet or exceed specific
state requirements. In addition, at least five states explicitly specify a preference for traffic
control devices made from recovered materials. One commenter representing several state
highway departments stated that the problems associated with the use of reclaimed materials
in temporary traffic control devices are expected to be minimal.
EPA believes that, as procuring agencies begin to obtain current information about
traffic control devices made with recovered materials, they will find that these devices meet
their performance requirements and will increase usage of these products.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
71
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, temporary traffic control devices. The Federal
government represents a large share of the market for traffic control devices, including
traffic cones and barricades. State highway departments use monies from the Federal
Highway Trust Fund to complete major construction and renovation projects, in which the
use of traffic control devices is extensive. Other major users of traffic control devices
include the Department of Transportation, Army Corps of Engineers, and Department of
Interior.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.13, EPA is designating two types of temporary traffic control devices
used in controlling or restricting vehicular traffic -- traffic cones and traffic barricades.
XIV. PARK AND RECREATION PRODUCTS
A. Playground Surfaces and Running Tracks
1. Background
In the CPG, EPA proposed designating playground surfaces and running tracks
containing recovered rubber or plastic (see 59 FR 18876).
a. Playground surfaces. EPA has identified 20 manufacturers/distributors of
playground surfaces made with recovered materials. These companies offer products made
of postconsumer rubber derived from old tires. Three of these companies use other
recovered materials as well, including blends of rubber/asphalt, rubber/compost, and,
rubber/PVC. One of these companies also makes playground surfaces containing
postconsumer PVC.
Playground surfaces made of rubber are often more desirable than other surfacing
materials, such as wood chips, sand, and asphalt, because they can provide more cushioning,
reduce injuries and abrasions, and may be safer for children.
b. Running tracks. Some of the companies that make playground surfaces also make
running tracks containing postconsumer tire rubber. Prior to issuance of the proposed CPG,
EPA obtained information from four of these companies, which indicated that they offer
running tracksmade of high percentages of postconsumer rubber. Some of the companies
use either a layer of virgin resin to provide added spike resistance, or small percentages of
preconsumer recovered rubber for coloring. One of these companies constructed the 1984
Olympic running tracks with recovered materials, and has constructed running tracks for
universities, schools, and state governments.
72
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
No commenters opposed the proposed designations of playground surfaces and
running tracks.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that both playground surfaces and running tracks satisfy the statutory
criteria for selecting items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. Playground surfaces and running tracks can
contain recovered rubber and PVC. As discussed above in section II.A, both of these
materials are signifcant components of municipal solid waste, and PVC is also found in
construction and demolition debris.
b. Technically proven uses. The companies surveyed by EPA have sold playground
surfaces made with recovered materials for a variety of installations, including McDonalds’
playgrounds, schools, and military bases. Running tracks made of recovered rubber have
also been constructed at universities, schools, military bases, the U.S. Olympics, and the
White House.
GSA does not have specifications for playground surfaces or running tracks; however,
Federal agency installations of these products must comply with applicable state or local
construction codes, as well as the Consumer Product Safety Commission standards and the
Americans With Disabilities Act. The Consumer Products Safety Commission requires that
playground surfaces meet certain performance standards to reduce head injuries, including
ASTM specification F 1292, pertaining to impact attenuation standards. Playground
surfacing and running tracks must also comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act,
which provides that mobility-impaired persons cannot be prohibited from access to public
places.
c. Impact of government procurement. Playground surfaces and running tracks are
used by Federal agencies for installation at military bases and parks and recreation facilities.
Playground surfaces are also us&l in day care centers and housing developments.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.14, EPA is designating playground surfaces and running tracks
containing recovered rubber or plastic. This designation does not preclude a procuring
agency from purchasing playground surfaces or running tracks manufactured using other
materials. It simply requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing playground surfaces
or running tracks manufactured from rubber or plastic, purchases such items made with
recovered materials.
73
XV. LANDSCAPING PRODUCTS
A. Hydraulic Mulch
1. Background
In the CPG, EPA proposed designating hydraulic mulch products used for landscaping
and erosion control in hydroseeding applications and as an over-spray for straw mulch (see
59 FR 18877, April 20, 1994). Hydraulic mulch is made of small pieces of cellulose fibers,
which can be either wood or paper. It is applied to a soil surface by mechanical spraying,
usually in a process known as hydroseeding, which involves spraying a mixture of water,
seeds, and the hydraulic mulch over soil. The mulch provides stability for the soil,
preventing erosion, and provides protection and warmth for the seeds, facilitating
germination.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
No commenters opposed the proposed designation of hydraulic mulch.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that hydraulic mulch products satisfy the statutory criteria for selecting
items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, paper is a
significant component of the solid waste stream. Construction and demolition debris contains
. a significant percentage of wood. Although recovered paper is used by the pulp and paper
industry, there continues to be a need for additional markets for this material.
b. Technically proven uses. EPA is aware of at least 37 manufacturers of paperbased hydraulic mulch located throughout the U.S. There also are several manufacturers of
wood-based hydraulic mulch using recovered wood.
The hydra&c mulch. industry is divided on the benefits and drawbacks of paper-based
and wood-based hydraulic mulch. Manufacturers of each item claim superior performance of
their products. It is EPA’s understanding that the International Erosion Control Association
is developing performance standards for hydraulic mulch to resolve the dispute over
performance.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, hydraulic mulch products. EPA estimated the 1990
expenditures for these products to be $10-15 million, or approximately 50 percent of the
hydraulic mulch industry’s total revenues. The Federal government represents a large share
of this market, because hydraulic mulch products are used extensively in highway
74
construction funded with monies from ‘the Federal Highway Trust Fund. Other major federal
users of seeding products arc the General Services Administration, Forest Service, Army
Corps of Engineers, and several bureaus within the Department of Interior. In addition,
Federal grant monies from the Department of Housing and Urban Development can be used
in landscaping and other soil management activities.
In the proposed CPG, EPA noted that the States of California, Illinois, Michigan,
Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington allow the use of paper-based hydraulic
mulch. The States of Missouri and New Hampshire commented that their specifications
permit the use of this product in one or more applications. In addition, the State of Georgia
commented that its specifications allow the use of wood-based hydraulic mulch products and
that use of paper-based hydraulic mulch products should not present a significant problem.
Based on the successful usage of paper-based hydraulic mulch by several of the states
and by Federal agencies, EPA believes that usage of this product will increase as procuring
agencies begin to obtain current information about the performance characteristics of paperbased hydraulic mulch and begin to use the products currently available.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.15(a), EPA is designating hydraulic mulch products used for
landscaping and erosion control in hydroseeding applications and as an over-spray for straw
mulch. This designation includes both paper-based hydraulic mulch and wood-based
hydraulic mulch containing recovered materials. Potential uses include reseeding and soil
stabilization during highway construction; seeding during pipeline installation, mine site
reclamation, and landfill closure; residential, institutional, and commercial landscaping;
temporary erosion control at construction sites; and seeding of athletic fields and golf
courses.
B. Yard Trimmings Compost
1. Background
In the CPG, the Agency proposed designating yard trimmings compost (see 59 FR
18877, April 20, 1994). Composting is a biological process of stabilizing organic matter
under controlled conditions into a product that is rich in humus and provides organic matter,
cation exchange and nutrients to the soil. Compost has been defined in the “Composting
Glossary” by the Compost Council, an industry trade group, as follows:
Compost is the stabilized and sanitized product of composting; compost is
largely decomposed material and is in the process of humification (curing).
Compost has little resemblance in physical form to the original material from
which it was made. Compost is a soil amendment, to improve soils. Compost
is not a complete fertilizer unless amended, although composts contain
75
fertilizer properties, e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, that must be
included in calculations for fertilizer application.
Composting serves as an alternative method of managing those organics that would
otherwise be landfilled. Although up to 60 percent of municipal solid waste is potentially
compostable (including food and paper), yard trimmings are the least controversial feedstock
for compost. Yard trimmings composting returns grass, twigs; and leaves to the soil. When
grass clippings are included with leaves and other yard trimmings, the resulting compost can
serve as a suitable nitrogen source with an optimal carbon/nitrogen ratio for many
applications. A significant portion of the yard trimmings is being composted, and the
percentage is increasing. Oily 651 yard trimmings composting facilities were operating in
1988. This increased to more than 2,200 yard trimmings composting facilities at the end of
1991, continuing to increase to nearly 3,000 facilities at the end of 1993. Thus, the quantity
of compost available from local sources is expected to increase in the near future.
There is currently not a large amount of compost produced from mixed municipal
solid waste produced in the U.S. As of February 1993, there were 20 mixed municipal solid
waste composting facilities in operation, 10 pilot programs, and about 60 projects under
development. The amount of compost being produced from food scraps is even smaller,
with much of the current production coming from pilot projects.
High quality compost is fully “mature,” which means that the cornposting process is
completed. Mature compost is free of pathogens and weed seeds. Compost is used as a soil
conditioner, soil amendment, lawn top dressing, potting soil mixture; rooting medium, and
mulch for shrubs and trees, and for improvement of golf and other sports turf. It has also
been used in erosion control, certain pollution prevention procedures (used to permanently
bind heavy metals in contaminated soils) and for soil reclamation. Compost can be used in
agriculture, horticulture, silviculture (growing of trees), and in landscaping. Compost can
also be used in land reclamation and revegetation of roadsides after road construction. An
important consideration for the compost purchaser is the availability of sufficient quantities of
high quality compost and certainty that it is of sufficiently high quality for its intended use.
Because of the high volume of yard trimmings currently discarded each year, there is no
current shortage of raw materials that would preclude composting facilities from supplying
large volumes of yard trimmings compost. Taken together, yard composts, biosolids
compost and mixed municipal composts are the most rapidly growing recycled content
products.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Support for compost designation. EPA received four comments specific to its
proposal to designate yard trimmings compost as a guideline item in the CPG. Three
commenters expressed general agreement that yard compost should be a designated item.
b. National standards for compost. One commenter expressed concern about the
76
proposed designation of yard trimmings compost because there are a lack of national
standards for this item.
The Agency does not believe that a lack of national standards will inhibit the general
use of yard trimmings compost, or that national standards are a necessary prerequisite for its
designation. As noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, compost can have many
different applications, each of which may require compost with differing characteristics. For
instance, using compost for turf establishment would typically require a mature, cured
compost, while an application for landfill cover might utilize less mature compost. As
explained in EPA’s draft RMAN issued concurrently with the proposed CPG, the State of.
Maine has developed quality standards for six different types of compost ranging from.
topsoil (three classes), to wetlands substrate, to mulch (two classes) (see 59 FR 18906, April
20,1994). These standards are being used by many state agencies in purchasing compost
and can serve as a guide to anyone purchasing this item. In addition to the guidance
afforded by the State of Maine’s quality standards, compost suppliers can assist procuring
agencies in determining the type(s) of compost needed for particular applications. The
agency recommends, therefore; that when purchasing yard trimmings compost, the specific
use of the compost should be described to the supplier to ensure the purchase of a product
compatible with the intended use.
In the preamble to the proposed CPG, EPA also noted that the Composting Council, a
diverse group of professionals engaged in promoting the beneficial use of compost, as well as
a number of state agencies, are developing standards and specifications for compost (see 59
FR 18878, April 20, 1994). As these standards are developed, EPA will make their.
availability known to procuring agencies by referencing them in a future Recovered Materials
Advisory Notice.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that yard trimmings compost satisfies the statutory criteria for selecting
items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, yard debris
(leaves, lawn clippings, bush and tree trimmings) comprise 16 percent of the municipal waste
stream. These materials can be composted and used as soil amendments, rather than
landfilled or incinerated. Thus, the use of compost can significantly reduce the amount of
yard trimmings, grass clippings, and leaves disposed in landfills and reduce one source of
methane emissions from landfills.
b. Technically proven uses. Adding compost to soils can improve their suitability for
plant growth. The organic matter in compost is particularly beneficial in poor soils. Adding
compost to clay soils reduces soil density and compaction, increases aeration, and increases
soil porosity and drainage. These changes lessen the danger of root rot disease. Compost
added to sandy soils binds soil particles to increase water and nutrient retention, as well as
77
.
resistance to drought and erosion.
The Composting Council is helping to define and develop industry-wide standards for
composts made from various combinations of these materials. The standards will include a
Standard Operating Guide for composting Facilities, which is currently available in draft form
from The Composting Council, as well as standards for suitability of different types of
composts for different markets, depending on the content of the compost.
Other advantages of compost, in addition to organic materials and nutrients being
returned to the soil are the following:
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡
The soil tilth and soils are improved.
Soil temperature is moderated, so that plant roots are warmed in winter and,
through water retention; are cooler in dry, hot conditions.
Increased organic content increases soil microbial activity, which fosters plant
growth.
Compost creates a favorable environment for earthworms that help aerate soil
and allow water to reach plant roots.
Mature composts suppress some plant diseases, such as wilt and root rot,
which reduces the need for chemical pesticides and fungicides.
A&compost nutrients, such as nitrogen, are in organic form and, therefore,
are released slowly overtime. The use of compost can reduce the need for
fertilizer by at least 50 percent.
Because less fertilizer and fewer pesticides are needed, pollution from nonpoint source runoff can be reduced.
(i). Disease control. Research conducted at Ohio State University and verified in
Florida, Pennsylvania, Alabama, and elsewhere, shows that compost replace part and, in
some cases, all of the fumigants and fungicides used on food crops or landscape projects on
Federal lands. When compost of bark and other materials is used in potting mixes, this will
prevent rotting of seedlings and roots caused by certain organisms. Also, compost has been
shown to be important in controlling wilt disease in certain flowers commonly grown for
indoor use. Specifically, compost prevents fusarium wilt disease on cyclamens, which is
important because there are no fungicides available which can do so. Other projects have
demonstrated that the use of compost can control. disease and result in reduced use of
fertilizers, which can leach into surface waters.
(ii). Benefits for soil reclamation. Compost can be used in soil reclamation projects.
The fine organic composition increases the soil’s water-holding capacity. Compost also
increases water infiltration into the soil. The formation of compost-soil aggregates reduces
soil compaction, increases soil friabiity and, therefore, decreases the erodability of soil.
The nutrient and organic carbon content of compost serve as a food source for soil microbes,
thus increasing the availability of the soil’s organic and nutrient content to plants at a rate
compatible with plant uptake and aiding faster recycling of nutrients within the system.
78
Finally, there are water-stable aggregates that are formed from the microbial by-products that
prevent the formation of surface crusts on soil, which can inhibit seedling growth.
c. Impact of government procurement. Military installations alone have about 20
million acres of land. The potential compost usage (at 40 cubic yards per acre) for even part
of this acreage would be immense. In addition, the Forest Service and Park Service maintain
500,000 miles of roadsides and embankments. Therefore, the Federal market for compost
made with yard trimmings, leaf compost, and/or grass clippings could be substantial.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.15(b), EPA is designating compost made from yard trimmings,
leaves; and/or grass clippings. for use in landscaping, seeding of grass or other plants on
roadsides and embankments, as a nutritious mulch under trees and shrubs, and in erosion
control and soil reclamation. As noted above, the number of mixedmunicipal compost and
food scrap composting facilities in the U.S. is limited. For this reason, EPA is not including
compost made with mixed municipal solid waste and/or food scraps in this designation.
XVI. NON-PAPER OFFICE PRODUCTS
A. Office Recycling Containers and Office Waste Receptacles
1. Background
In the proposed CPG, the Agency proposed designating office recycling containers
and waste receptacles made from paper, plastic, and steel (see 59 FR 18878, April 20,
1994). These containers and receptacles include all indoor receptacles used for the collection
and transport of waste and/or recyclable materials, such as deskside containers, centralized
containers, and other containers for coding and transporting waste and/or recyclables.
Desk tray style recycling containers are covered under section XVI.B of this document,
which discusses plastic desktop accessories.
a. Paper containers. Corrugated paper office recycling containers are available
through GSA's Special Order Program. GSA literature refers to these products as being
made of "fiberboard." Recycling containers made from corrugated or other paper products
are covered under the paperboard section of EPA’s procurement guideline for paper and
paper products (Section A of the RMAN that accompanies the CPG).
Currently, EPA has information only on paper recycling containers made from
corrugated paper. However, since office recycling containers and office waste receptacles
are similar in their manufacture and basic materials content, EPA believes that this
information is also applicable to office waste receptacles made from other recovered paper
products.
79
b. Plastic containers. Plastic office recycling containers and office waste receptacles
are made primarily from HDPE or LDPE, but EPA is aware of at least one vendor that
manufactures these items using commingled plastic resins.
c. Steel containers. Steel containers are available that are made from recovered
materials. According to a recent article published by the Steel Recycling Institute, all steel
products contain either 25 or 30 percent recovered steel or virtually 100 percent recovered
materials content when made with North American Steel (“The Recycling Magnet”, Fall
1994). Based on this information, the Agency believes that office recycling containers and
waste receptacles made from steel contain similar percentages of recovered materials.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Scope of designation. One commenter questioned EPA’s proposed designation of
steel office recycling containers and office waste receptacles, stating that the amount of steel
used to manufacture such items is inconsequential when compared to the amount of steel
produced in the U.S. Another commenter stated that the designation of recycling containers
and waste receptacles made from multiple materials (i.e., plastic, steel, and paper) could
encourage the purchase of plastic and paper contain&s rather than the traditional steel
containers.
EPA encourages the use of all recovered materials in products and does not favor one
material over another. If EPA did not include steel containers in its designation, procuring
agencies might assume that EPA was recommending the use of plastic or paper containers
only, when this is not the case. Additionally, steel containers made from recovered materials
are readily available as are containers made from plastic and Paper. For these reasons, the
Agency believes it is appropriate to designate containers made from steel, paper, and plastic.
EPA also believes that the type of containers purchased should be the sole decision of the
procuring agencies and that they can best choose the product that meets their needs.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that office recycling containers and office waste receptacles satisfy the
statutory criteria for selecting items for designation.
a. Use of, materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, plastics,
paper, and steel are significant components of the solid waste stream.
b. Technically proven uses. EPA is aware of at least four manufacturers that produce
office recycling Containers and office waste receptacles using recovered plastic. In addition,
plastic containers are available through GSA’s Federal Supply Schedule 72 VII B, “Recycling
Collection Containers and Specialty Waste Receptacles.” GSA also has corrugated recycling
containers available through its Special Order Program. EPA is also aware that there are
manufacturers that produce office recycling containers and waste receptacles made from
80
steel.
According to the information available to EPA; there are no national or Federal
specifications that preclude the use of recovered materials in the manufacture of office
recycling containers and office waste receptacles. In lieu of referencing national or Federal
specifications, procuring agencies usually incorporate recovered materials content
requirements into their solicitation or contract documents When purchasing these products.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, office recycling containers and office waste
receptacles. EPA does not have specific data on the number of office recycling containers
and office waste receptacles procured by government agencies, although EPA expects that the
quantities are significant. Thus, the Agency believes that these items are procured in
sufficient quantities to support the designation of these items.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.16(a), EPA is designating office recycling containers and office waste
receptacles made from plastic, paper, and steel, as items that are or can be made with
recovered materials. This designation includes all indoor receptacles used for the collection
and transport of waste and/or recovered materials, such as deskside containers, centralized
containers, and other containers for collecting and transporting waste and/or recyclables, and
other items as determined by the procuring agency. This designation does not preclude a
procuring agency from purchasing containers or receptacles manufactured using other
materials, such as wood. It simply requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing office
recycling containers or office waste receptacles manufactured from plastic, paper, or steel,
purchase such containers made with recovered materials.
B. Plastic Desktop Accessories
1. Background
In the CPG, the Agency proposed designating plastic desktop accessories containing
recovered materials (see 59 FR 18879, April 20, 1995). Plastic desktop accessories include
desk organizers, desk sorters, desk trays, letter nays, memo pad holders, note pad holders,
and pencil holders. They are typically made from polystyrene and are manufactured by
injection-molding: These items are grouped together due to their similarity in manufacture
and composition.
Currently, EPA has information on plastic desktop accessories made from
postconsumer recovered polystyrene only. In the proposed rule, EPA requested information
on desktop accessories made from other recovered materials and the recovered materials
content levels of those products (see 59 FR 18879, April 20, 1994). During the public
comment period, the Agency did not receive any additional information in this regard.
81
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
No commenters opposed the proposed designation of plastic desktop accessories.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that plastic desktop accessories satisfy the statutory criteria for selecting
items for designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, plastics
represent a significant component of the solid waste stream.
b. Technically proven uses. EPA is aware of at least three manufacturers that
produce plastic desktop accessories with postconsumer recovered materials content. In
addition, several office products distributors carry these accessories as part of their product
lines. GSA also makes these products available through its Federal Supply Schedule.
According. to the information available to EPA, there are no national or Federal
specifications that preclude the use of recovered materials in the manufacture of plastic
desktop accessories. In lieu of referencing national or Federal specifications, procuring
agencies usually incorporate recovered materials content requirements into their solicitation
or contract documents when purchasing these products.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, plastic desktop accessories. EPA does not have
specific data on the number of plastic desktop accessories procured by government agencies.
However, EPA believes that these items are procured in sufficient quantities to support the
designation of these items.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.16(b), EPA is designating plastic desktop accessories as items that are
or can be made with recovered materials. This designation includes desk organizers, desk
sorters, desk trays, letter trays, memo pad holders, note pad holders, and pencil holders, and
other, items as de&mined by the procuring agency. This designation does not preclude a
procuring agency from purchasing desktop accessories manufactured from another material,
such as wood. It simply requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing plastic desktop
accessories, purchase these accessories made with recovered materials, EPA encourages
agencies purchasing desktop accessories made with other materials to seek these items
containing recovered materials as well.
82
C. Toner Cartridges
1. Background
In the CPG, the Agency proposed designating remanufactured toner cartridges (59 FR
18879i April 20, 1994). Toner cartridges are defined as toner cartridges used in laser
printers, photocopiers, facsimile machines, or microphotographic printers. Remanufactured
toner cartridges are further defined as toner cartridges that have been remanufactured in
accordance with the procedures set forth in GSA’s Standard Procedure FCG-STD-111.
At proposal, EPA provided information regarding the recycled toner cartridge
preference provision set forth in 42 U.S.C. 6962j. Section 1554 of the Federal Acquisition
Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA) (Pub. L. 103-355) repealed this provision, removing any
reference to procurement of toner cartridges from RCRA.
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
EPA received several comments on the proposed designation of remanufactured toner
cartridges. In general, these comments felt into four categories: scope of designation,
product quality, actions of Congress, and disposition of expended cartridges.
a. Scope of designation. Two commenters contested EPA’s designation of
remanufactured toner cartridges, citing RCRA section 6002(e)(1) and Executive Order 12873
as requiring EPA to designate items made with ‘recovered,” not “remanufactured” materials.
The commenters further stated that, should EPA proceed with its designation of
remanufactured toner cartridges, it should expand the designation to include replacement
toner cartridges made from recovered materials as well.
EPA believes that the designation of remanufactured toner cartridges is consistent
with the directives contained in RCRA section 6002 and Executive Order 12873. EPA
believes that the reuse of materials in remanufacturing operations falls within the statutory
definition of "recovered materials" in that these are materials ‘which have been recovered or
diverted from solid waste, but . . . not generated from, and commonly reused within, an
original manufacturing process." Additionally, in 1988, the Agency designated retread tires
as a guideline item (53 FR 46558, November 17, 1988). Retread tires are also
remanufactured items.
EPA now has information that toner cartridges made with recovered materials are
available for purchase Thus, EPA agrees with the commenters that it is appropriate at this
time to designate toner cartridges made with recovered materials as welt as remanufactured
toner cartridges. Therefore, the Agency has changed its designation from remanufactured
toner cartridges’ to “toner cartridges” to include replacement cartridges made with recovered
materials.
83
b. Product quality. Two commenters expressed concern that remanufactured toner
cartridges are of poorer quality than new cartridges. One commenter stated that GSA’s
Standard Procedure does not establish the technical performance standards necessary to
ensure consistent quality.
EPA disagrees with the commenters. EPA’s research shows that tests conducted by
an independent testing laboratory indicate that, in general, the quality of remanufactured
cartridges is comparable to that of new cartridges. In fact, when price is considered and all
other factors are equal, remanufactured toner cartridges may be more appealing.
The Agency notes that, as with any product, the quality of a remanufactured toner
cartridge is dependent on the condition of the cartridge itself and the process used to
remanufacture it. EPA believes, that, at this time, the GSA Standard Procedure provides the
minimum steps necessary to ensure product quality. EPA further recommends that, prior to
ordering large. quantities of remanufactured toner cartridges from a single vendor, purchasers
teat the cartridges to ensure they are satisfied with the quality of the product.
c. Actions of Congress. One commenter raised concern that the remanufactured toner
cartridge designation is inconsistent with Congressional intent to streamline the Federal
acquisition process, citing the recent repeal of the toner cartridge preference provision in 42
U.S.C. 6962j.
As noted in section XVI.C.1 above, Section 1554 of the Federal Acquisition
Streamlining Act (Pub. L. 103-355) (FASA) repealed the preference for procurement of
recycled toner cartridges. EPA sought and obtained the following information from
Congressional staff concerning this action.
(i). Background. Section 630 of the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1993 (Pub. L. 102-123), amended 42 U.S.C. 6962 by adding a new
section requiring Federal agencies to purchase recycled toner cartridges (42 U.S.C. 6962(j)).
The following year, Section 401 of the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1994 (Pub. L. 103-123). amended and replaced 42 U.S.C. 6962(j).
Federal agencies were no longer "required" to purchase recycled toner cartridges, but they
were ‘authorized to give preference to” remanufactured toner cartridges.
As part of the FASA development process, Congress sought to streamline the
acquisition Process by removing unnecessary, and confusing provisions affecting Federal
procurement. One of the provisions included in this effort was the toner cartridge preference
provision at 42 U.S.C. 6962j.
(ii). Congressional intent. According to Congressional staff, Congress believed that by
changing the "requirement" to purchase recycled toner cartridges to a "preference," the 1994
amendment stripped this provision of its regulatory authority. In addition; Congress was
aware of EPA’s proposal to designate remanufactured toner cartridges in the proposed CPG
84
and determined that, if EPA designated toner cartridges in the final CPG, the presence of the
voluntary procurement provision in 42 U.S.C. 6962(j) would only create contusion among
procuring agencies and product manufacturers.
d. Disposition of spent cartridges. Two commenters emphasized the importance of
Collecting and returning expended toner cartridges for remanufacturing/recycling purposes.
EPA agrees and encourages procuring agencies to collect their empty cartridges and
return them to vendors for remanufacturing/recycling purposes.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that toner cartridges satisfy the statutory criteria for selecting items for
designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. According to research conducted by BIS Strategic
Decisions, 27.75 million toner cartridges were produced for the U.S. market in 1993. Of
these cartridges, 71 percent were new cartridges and 29 percent were remanufactured
cartridges. Based on these data, the Agency is convinced that a significant number of
expended toner cartridges are diverted from the solid waste stream by toner cartridge
remanufacturing and recycling efforts and encourages government agencies to collect their
empty cartridges and return them to vendors for remanufacturing/recycling purposes.
b. Technically proven uses. Toner cartridges are commonly used by government
agencies and private businesses.
(i). Remanufactured toner cartridges. Toner cartridge remanufacturing, services are
available and increasing, in usage. Over the past few years, the number of vendors that offer
toner cartridge remanufacturing services has increased substantially. As of December 1994,
GSA’s New Item Introductory Schedule for remanufactured toner cartridges listed 117
vendors. In addition, GSA has two vendors that provide remanufactured toner cartridges to
its supply program. Also, Federal Prison Industries remanufactures a broad line of toner
cartridges for laser printers, copiers, and facsimile machines.
The performance of a remanufactured toner cartridge can vary based on the condition
of the cartridge and the process used to remanufacture it. Currently, there is no Federal
testing program for remanufactured toner cartridges; however, there are at least two
independent laboratories that have vendor cartridge quality testing and evaluation programs.
In addition, GSA has established procedures by which remanufacturers providing
remanufactured toner cartridges to its supply program are to disassemble, clean, replace parts
within, refill, and reassemble expended cartridges. Several states, including Wisconsin,
Connecticut, and Mississippi, also have performance requirements in their specifications for
remanufactured toner cartridges.
85
(ii). New toner cartridges made with recovered materials. EPA is aware of at least
two manufacturers that produce new toner cartridges with recovered materials content. EPA
is not aware of any Federal or national specifications that preclude the use of recovered
materials in the manufacture of new toner cartridges.
c. Impact of Government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, toner cartridges. EPA does not have specific data
on the number of toner cartridges procured by government agencies, although EPA estimates
that the quantities are substantial. Thus, the Agency believes that these items are procured in
sufficient quantities to support the designation of these items.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.16(c), EPA is designating toner cartridges as items that are or can be
made with recoveredmaterials. This designation includes remanufactured toner cartridges,
toner cartridge remanufacturing services, and new cartridges made with recovered materials.
D. Binders
1. Background
In the CPG, the Agency proposed designating three types of biers: chipboard,
vinyl or plastic-covered chipboard or paperboard, and cloth-covered chipboard or paperboard
(see 59 FR 18880, April 20, 1994). Chipboard binders are considered paperboard products
and are manufactured with high percentages of postconsumer recovered paper. The
chipboard or paperboard component of a cloth-covered binder is made with high percentages
of postconsumer recovered paper. In plastic-covered binders, the paperboard or chipboard
component is usually covered with vinyl or another plastic; such as polyethylene, and may
have another clear plastic coating over the vinyl or other plastic. Many binders, such as the
three-ring binders, also contain steel components which are universally made from recovered
steel.
In ‘the proposed CPG, EPA requested information on other types of binders made, with
recovered materials and the levels of recovered materials contained in these binders (see 59
FR 18880, April 20, 1994). The Agency received additional information on pressboard
binders. Pressboard is a higher-strength paperboard that, when used for binders, is not
covered by cloth or plastic. Two commenters explained that EPA had erred in not including
pressboard binders in the proposed designation. Pressboard, like chipboard and paperboard,
is made with high levels of postconsumer paper and paper products and is, in fact, used in
the manufacture of binders. The Agency inadvertently omitted reference to pressboard
binders in the proposed CPG designation for binders and has now included them in the final
designation.
86
2. Summary of Comments and Agency’s Response
a. Chipboard binders. One commenter stated that he was not aware of any binders
made of chipboard only, but mentioned that many binders ate made exclusively of
pressboard.
The Agency is aware of two manufacturers that produce uncovered chipboard binders
made from recovered materials.. According to these manufacturers, their binders contain up
to 100 percent recovered materials. Therefore, EPA is designating both covered and
uncovered chipboard binders in the final CPG.
b. Pressboard binders. Another commenter stated that EPA’s proposed item
designation for binders was incomplete because it did ‘not mention binders made from
pressboard.
This commenter is correct; EPA inadvertently omitted reference to pressboard in the
proposed CPG under the erroneous assumption that "pressboard" was included in the term
“chipboard.” EPA has since determined that this is not the case. For this reason, today’s
final item designation for binders references chipboard and pressboard, both of which are
paper and paperboard products. As explained in the Recovered Materials Advisory Notice
that accompanies the final CPG, procuring agencies should rely on the guidance provided in
Section II, Part A of the Recovered Materials Advisory Notice that accompanies this final
CPG and in the draft Paper products Recovered Materials Advisory Notice (60 FR 14182,
March 15, 1995) when purchasing chipboard or pressboard binders.
c. Cloth-covered binders. In the proposed CPG notice, EPA stated that it was not
aware of any manufacturera of cloth-covered binders that use recovered materials when
producing the cloth cover and requested comment on the validity of this information. During
the public comment period, the Agency did not receives any information that would indicate
that the cloth cover used for binders contains any recovered materials. Therefore, the
Agency is not recommending recovered materials content levels for the cloth component of
covered binders.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that binders satisfy the statutory criteria for selecting items for
designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, plastics and
paper are significant components of the solid waste stream.
b. Technically proven uses. EPA is aware of at least three manufacturers that
produce plastic-covered binders with recovered plastic content in the covering, and two
manufacturers that produce chipboard binders with recovered paper content. In addition,
87
there are a number of manufacturer’s that produce pressboard binders. At least one of the
manufacturers of plastic-covered binders with recovered plastic content sells its binders
through GSA’s New Item Introductory Schedule. As previously discussed, the paperboard,
chipboard and pressboard used in binders for which EPA has information are made from
high percentages of postconsumer recovered paper. Several states have also issued
solicitations for plasticcovered, chipboard and pressboard binders containing recovered
materials:
According to the information available to EPA, there are no national or Federal
specifications that preclude the use of recovered paper in the manufacture of chipboard
binders. GSA’s specification for binders, A-A-2549A, ‘Rider, Loose-Leaf (Ring),” covers
four types of binders, including cloth bound, flexible cover; cloth bound, stiff cover; plastic
bound, flexible cover; and plastic hound, stiff cover. In the specification, GSA requires its
binders to contain “a minimum of 100% waste paper, including a minimum of 30%
postconsumer recovered materials.” Based on EPA’s information, there are no requirements
in this specification that preclude the use of recovered materials in the plastic covering of
plastic-covered binders. However, prior to issuance of the proposed CPG, EPA spoke to one
manufacturer who stated that one test method cited in the specification, the Cold Crack test,
may restrict the use of recovered plastic in the covering for plastic-covered binders. The
Agency then requested information in the proposed CPG on the ability of vendors to meet
this specification (see 59 FR 18880, April 20, 1994). Based on the information received in
response to the request for comment as well as additional information gathered by the
Agency, EPA is recommending lower recovered materials content levels in plastic binders in
the final RMAN.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, binders. EPA does not have specific data on the
number of binders procured by government agencies, although EPA estimates that the
quantities are significant. Thus, EPA believes that binders are procured in sufficient
quantities to support the designation under RCRA section 6002.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.16(d), EPA is designating binders as items that are or can be made
with recovered materials. This designation includes: (1) plastic-covered binders with
recovered plastic content; (2) chipboard and pressboard binders with postconsumer recovered
paper content; and (3) the paper component of covered binders. This designation does not
preclude a procuring agency from purchasing a binder covered with or manufactured using
another material, such as cloth. It simply requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing
the designated types of binders, purchase these items made with recovered materials.
5. Recovered Materials Content Recommendations
EPA designated paper and paper products as procurement items in 1988 at 40 CFR
88
Part 250. Because both the chipboard and pressboard used in binders are types of
paperboard, they are already included in the 1988 designation. In a March 15, 1995 draft
RMAN, EPA proposed ‘revised recovered materials recommendations for paper and paper
products (see 60 FR 14182). The draft RMAN contains recommendations content levels for
pressboard binders within the “bristols” subcategory and draft recommended content levels
for chipboard within the miscellaneous paperboard subcategory. Procuring agencies should
refer to these recommendations for covered and uncovered chipboard, pressboard, and other
paperboard products used in binders.
E. Plastic Trash Bags
1. Background
In the CPG, the Agency proposed designating plastic trash bags (see 59 FR 18881,
April 20, 1994). Plastic trash bags, also called trash can liners, are widely available with
recovered materials content. They come in a wide variety of colors, ranging from clear to
black; sires, ranging from 11 gallon to 5.5 gallon; and thicknesses, ranging from 0.5 mil to
1.7 mil. According to the information available, to EPA, HDPE, LDPE, and LLDPE are the
recovered materials most commonly used to manufacture these items. The actual amount of
recovered materials contained in a bag is affected by the color, sire, and thickness of the
bag.
At proposal, EPA stated that we had information only on trash bags made from
postconsumer recovered plastic and requested information on trash bags made from other
recovered materials and the recovered, materials content levels of those products (see 59 FR
18881, April 20, 1994). The agency received no information in response to this request.
2. Summary of Comments and-Agency’s Response
No commenters opposed the proposed designation of plastic trash bags.
3. Rationale for Designation
EPA believes that plastic trash bags satisfy the statutory criteria for selecting items for
designation.
a. Use of materials in solid waste. As discussed above in section II.A, plastics are a
significant component of the solid waste stream.
b. Technically proven uses. EPA is aware of at least five manufacturers that produce
trash bags with recovered materials content. In addition, trash bags with recovered materials
content are available from the GSA “Supply Catalog.” Also, the National Association of
State Purchasing Officials’ Recycled Product Database, which provides detailed information
on state purchases of products containing recovered materials, lists 88 different contracts for
89
plastic liners with recovered materials content.
GSA’s Commercial Item Descriptions (CIDs), A-A-2299B and A-A-1668D, cover
plastic trash bags. These CIDs are based on performance requirements. According to the
information available to EPA, neither CID precludes the use of recovered materials in the
manufacture of plastic trash bags. In addition, several states, including Michigan, Nebraska,
Minnesota, Delaware, and Wisconsin, have their own specifications for plastic trash bags
containing recovered materials.
c. Impact of government procurement. Government agencies purchase, or use
appropriated Federal funds to purchase, trash bags. EPA does not have specific data on the
number of trash bags procured by government agencies, although EPA estimates that the
quantities are significant. Thus, the Agency believes that these items are procured in
sufficient quantities to support the designation of these items. As previously discussed, the
National Association of State Purchasing Officials’ Recycled Product Database lists 88
different contracts for plastic liners with recovered materials content.
4. Designation
In 40 CFR 247.16(e), EPA is designating plastic trash bags as items that are or can
be made with recovered materials. This designation does not preclude a procuring agency
from purchasing a trash bag manufactured using another material, such as paper. It simply
requires that a procuring agency, when purchasing trash bags, purchase these items made
from recovered materials EPA encourages agencies purchasing trash bags made with other
materials to seek these items containing recovered materials as well.
XVII. MISCELLANEOUS
In the new Part 247, EPA established 247.17 for item designations that do not fall
within any other product c&gory. However, EPA is not currency designating any items in
this category.
XVIII. OTHER ITEMS CONSIDERED FOR DESIGNATION
In addition to the items proposed for designation, EPA listed 23 items as potential
items for designation and four items that the Agency felt were inappropriate for designation.
The Agency also requested information and comments on these items (see 59 FR 1888 1,
April 20, 1994).
A. Potential Items for Designation
In addition to the items proposed for designation, EPA listed and requested
90
information on 23 items as potential items for future designation and 4 items that the Agency
believed were inappropriate for designation at this time (59 FR 18881, April 20, 1994).
EPA received comments on most of the 23 items listed as potential items for future
designation. In addition, EPA received comments on pallet stretch wrap and strapping,
‘which, at proposal, were two of the items EPA believed to be inappropriate to designate (59
FR 18812, April 20, 1994). Three commenters provided information on pallet stretch wrap
and one on strapping, indicating that these two items may be suitable for designation. The
information provided in the comments will be considered when the Agency’ evaluates items
for possible designation in a future update of the CPG.
B. Items Considered Inappropriate for Designation
EPA, described sheet glass and glass fiber in the preamble to the proposed CPG as
inappropriate to designate based on the information available to the Agency (see 59 FR 1881,
April 20, 1994). EPA received no comments or information to suggest otherwise and,
therefore, will not consider these items in the next update of the CPG.
XIX. AVAILABILITY OF DESIGNATED ITEMS
EPA has developed lists of manufacturers and vendors of the items designated in
today’s final CPG. These lists will be updated periodically as new sources are identified and
EPA becomes aware of changes in product availability. To assist procuring agencies, the
lists will be made available at no charge by calling EPA’s RCRA Hotline at (800) 424-9346,
or, in the Washington, D.C. area, at (703) 412-9810. They also will be available for review
in the RCRA Information Center (RIC). Procuring agencies are encouraged to contact
manufacturers and vendors directly to discuss their specific needs and to obtain detailed
information on the availability and price of recycled content products meeting those needs.
The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) publishes an ‘Environmental
Products Guide,” which lists items available through its Federal Supply Service. This Guide
is updated periodically as new items become available. Copies of the GSA ‘Environmental
products Guide” can be obtained by contacting GSA’s Centralized Mailing List Service in
Fort Worth, Texas at (817) 334-5215.
In addition to the information provided by EPA and GSA, there are other publiclyavailable sources of information about products containing recovered materials. For
example, the. “Official Recycled Products Guide” (RPG) was established in March 1989 to
provide a broad range of information on recycled content products. Listings include product,
company name, address, contact, telephone, fax, type of company (manufacturer or
distributor), and minimum recycled content. Price information is not included. The RPG is
available on a subscription basis from American Recycling Market, Inc., (800) 267-9707.
Private corporations that have researched recycled product availability may also be willing to
91
®
make this information publicly available. For instance, as part of the McRecycle USA
program, the McDonald’s Corporation established a Registry Service for manufacturers and
suppliers of recycled content products. The Corporation has compiled a database of
registrants and makes this information available upon request. More information on the
®
McRecycle USA Registry Service is available by calling (800) 220-3809.
State and local recycling programs are also a potential source of information on local
distributors and availability. In addition, state and local government purchasing officials that
are contracting for recycled content products may have relative price information. A list of
state purchasing/procurement officials has been placed in the RIC and will be updated
periodically. Also included in the public docket is a list of states with recycled content
products purchasing programs, current as of April 1994.
Information is also available from trade associations whose members manufacture or
distribute products containing recovered materials. A list of such trade associations-is also
included in the RIC.
XX. ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Details on EPA’s Economic Impact Analysis for the CPG are described in the
“Technical Background Document for the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline” which is
included in the RCRA public docket for the final CPG.
92